Appeal No. 1998-0622
Application No. 08/360,972
“[i]t would have been
obvious . . . to modify the function of allocating bandwidth
as disclosed by Buhrke et al. With encoding and compressing
the data prior to transfer depending on the allocated
requested bandwidth as disclosed by Caci to achieve bandwidth
efficiency . . . .” Appellants argue at length against the
references to Buhrke and to Caci at pages 6 to 10 of the brief
and conclude, id. at page 10, that “[t]hus, neither Buhrke nor
Caci discloses a resource allocation device that (1)
dynamically allocates requested bandwidths according to
bandwidths availability for real-time interactive
communications, (ii) encodes the information according to the
dynamically allocated bandwidth, and (iii) selectively
transmits the encoded information.” We agree
with the appellants’ position. The examiner has not shown how
or where in Buhrke, or Caci, or in the combination, the
request elements recited in these claims and illustrated in
Figure 4 of the specification are to be found. Thus, we are
of the opinion that the examiner has not met her burden of
establishing a prima
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007