Appeal No. 1998-1106
Application No. 08/593,110
Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
The obviousness rejection of claims 1 through 13 is
sustained as to claims 1 and 5, and is reversed as to claims 2
through 4 and 6 through 13.
According to appellant (brief, page 6):
Independent claim 1 requires an administrative
programmable logic controller (ADPLC) which executes
a data logging program that accumulates in the
memory of the ADPLC, data generated by the ADPLC and
data generated by other programmable logic
controllers, and which sends the accumulated data to
an FA controller, such that the ADPLC acts as a
buffer between the FA controller and the other PLCs.
No combination of Kabe and Burke suggests an ADPLC
meeting these limitations.
Appellant’s arguments (brief, pages 6 through 9) to the
contrary notwithstanding, Kabe discloses (Figures 1 and 3) a
PLC master station 11 that acts as a buffer between the
programmable logic controllers 14 and 15 and the FA function
that is performed by the processing computer 3. The PLC
master station by virtue of its status as a master in a2
2On page 2556 of the excerpt from the Van Nostrand’s
Scientific Encyclopedia attached to the reply brief, it is
noted that when PLCs are connected in a master/slave
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007