Appeal No. 2000-1363
Application No. 08/848,374
configuration file. Therefore, we cannot sustain the rejection
of claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, as explained supra for claim 1, although
Harada does indicate (column 6, lines 57-63) that when no stored
configuration information matches the detected configuration
settings, user participation is required to setup "new" system
configuration, Harada does not detail how the user sets up such
"new" configurations. Accordingly, we would have to speculate
that the user in Harada selects stored configuration settings in
such situations. Consequently, we cannot sustain the rejection
of claim 19.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 19
and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed as to claims 5 through
7, 9, 11 through 14, 16, and 21 and reversed as to claims 1
through 4, 8, 10, 15, and 17 through 19.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007