Appeal No. 2000-1973
Application 08/890,906
We see several problems with the examiner's reasoning.
First, the "objects" in Kelly are "data structures which store
information about the user processes running in the system"
(col. 2, lines 1-3) and are not objects in the OOP sense of a
self-sufficient module that contains both data and functions
(methods). Not all objects in computer science are objects in
the OOP sense. The examiner relies on an OOP definition of
"encapsulation," but while the object may be considered to
contain "first object data," the examiner has not shown where
Kelly discloses "a first at least one method program associated
with said first object," so that Kelly encapsulates both data and
a method. Thus, the rejection is based on an erroneous
assumption about the nature of the objects. Second, there is no
teaching of the objects in Kelly having "public" methods and
"private" data, undoubtably because the objects are not OOP
objects having data and methods. Therefore, the rejection is
based on improper speculation about a user accessing a public
method which accesses private data. It is improper to resort to
speculation or unfounded assumptions to supply deficiencies in
the factual basis for a rejection. See In re Warner,
379 F.2d 1011, 1017, 154 USPQ 173, 178 (CCPA 1967). Third, the
fact that Kelly does not disclose a user accessing an object's
private data directly does not mean that user methods access data
through a "public" method interface; no method interface in the
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007