Appeal No. 1998-2569
Application No. 08/517,132
with initial data from a stored starting data block as
claimed. We further agree with Appellants that the specific
claimed data structure in which starting block data and
response block data are stored as part of a status switch data
unit is not found in the disclosure of Susman.
In view of the above discussion, it is our opinion that,
since all of the claim limitations are not present in the
disclosure of Susman, the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection
of independent claims 1 and 6, as well as claims 2-5 and 7-11
dependent thereon, can not be sustained.
Turning to a consideration of the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 rejection of claims 1-16, all of the pending claims,
based on the combination of Susman and Hamada, we do not
sustain this rejection as well. In the Examiner’s view, the
skilled artisan would have found it obvious to “apply Hamada’s
timing conditions to Susman because of Hamada’s taught
advantages of scheduling” (Answer, page 4).
Our review of Hamada, however, reveals no disclosure
which would overcome the deficiencies of Susman discussed
supra, i.e., there is no description of a stored starting
block and response block data structure nor any comparison of
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007