Appeal No. 96-0712 Page 11
Application No. 08/015,756
20 to a computer terminal port and there is a source listing
for the computer program used with the microprocessor. The
examiner concludes, therefrom, that “the fax controller can be
a fax computer or according to claims 12 and 13, a central
server computer disposed on the networked computer system.” We
find no fault with the examiner’s reasoning and we have no
reply brief from appellant refuting the examiner’s reasoning.
Appellant’s response, in toto, to the examiner’s allegations is
merely to state that “this is not true” [brief-page 6] and to
point to page 2, lines 3-9 of the instant specification. We
have referred to that portion of the specification which refers
to a typical LAN system. The claims are not specificaly
directed to a LAN system and, to the extent that they are, we
do not understand how a reference in the specification to a LAN
system refutes the examiner’s allegation that the fax
controller of Herbst serves the function of the claimed
“networked computer system.”
Appellant further takes issue with the examiner’s
identification of computer 70 of Herbst as the claimed “first
facsimile-compatible modem coupled to the facsimile
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007