Ex Parte GUPTA et al - Page 1




                                       The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written                                   
                                               for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.                                           

                                                                                                                      Paper No. 16                  

                                        UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                                                   
                                                                   ____________                                                                     
                                              BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                                    
                                                            AND INTERFERENCES                                                                       
                                                                   ____________                                                                     
                                                  Ex parte AMIT GUPTA, ISRAEL CIDON                                                                 
                                                              and RAPHAEL ROM                                                                       
                                                                   ____________                                                                     
                                                              Appeal No. 2001-1123                                                                  
                                                           Application No. 08/990,759                                                               
                                                                   ____________                                                                     
                                                                     ON BRIEF                                                                       
                                                                   ____________                                                                     
                 Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON, and KRASS, Administrative Patent Judges.                                                                  
                 HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                                                             



                                                            DECISION ON APPEAL                                                                      
                          This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1 through 15, 17 and 19 through 33.                                  
                          The disclosed invention relates to a method and apparatus for selectively communicating via                               
                 either a connectionless protocol or a connection oriented protocol.                                                                
                          Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads as follows:                                                
                          1.  Apparatus for engaging in communications, comprising:                                                                 
                          a.      a communications interface; and                                                                                   
                          b.      a processor, connected to said communications interface and configured to initiate                                





Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007