Appeal No. 2000-1699
Application No. 08/706,123
principles of inherency, each and every element of a claimed
invention as well as disclosing structure which is capable of
performing the recited functional limitations. RCA Corp. v.
Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221
USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228
(1984); W.L. Gore and Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721
F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert.
denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
The examiner indicates how he finds anticipation of
these claims on pages 3-6 of the examiner’s answer. Appellants
argue that Tejima does not disclose the recitation in each of
independent claims 25 and 27 that “said master processing device
broadcasting data to all of said client processing devices and
selecting one and only one of said client processing devices to
acknowledge receipt of each bit of data said master processing
device broadcasts to all of said client processing devices.”
Specifically, appellants argue that since Tejima teaches that
each of the remote stations is periodically interrogated by the
central station to return a supervisory acknowledgment packet
for monitoring purposes, Tejima does not teach that “one and
only one” of the client devices acknowledge receipt of each bit
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007