Appeal No. 1999-2380
Application No. 08/575,743 Page 8
of an executable packet is associated with a secured computer, is
not associated with a secured computer, or whether association
with a secured computer is uncertain. We find that the term "or"
refers to determining which of the three listed states the source
address corresponds to. To meet the claim, the prior art would
have to be capable of considering all three states in order to be
able to determine which state is associated with the source
address. We therefore agree with appellants (brief, page 9) that
“[t]he conjunction 'OR' in Claim 1 merely recognizes that any
single source address will be associated with only one of the
three states, not that only one of the three states need be
considered when processing data packets. As discussed above, all
Claims 2-20 recite, either through dependence from Claim 1 or
independently of Claim 1, similar subject matter.”
The examiner further asserts (answer, pages 5 and 6) that
"out of the three states described in claim 1, two are redundant
in definition, uncertain and no[t] associated with a secured
computer."
Appellants assert (brief, page 9) that three separate states
are recited by the claims; that the examiner's folding of three
separate states into two is inconsistent with the teachings of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007