Appeal No. 2001-1507
Application No. 08/972,129
The examiner maintains that Zhang teaches retrieving an application and
computing a signature using the application. (See answer at page 14.) The examiner
maintains that Zhang also teaches the limitation of comparing with respect to the
“verification” using the hash of Zhang. The examiner then maintains that appellants’
disclosure at pages 21-22 with respect to the disclosed comparing clearly corresponds
to the hash of Zhang. We disagree with the examiner and do not find that the hash of
the signature of Zhang is compared to prior stored signatures. Rather the hash result
which is generated is verified and the signature is compared to the prior signatures, but
the first signature would not then be generated by the application. Therefore, the
examiner’s interpretation of Zhang is strained to try to manipulate the processes of
Zhang to meet the claim limitations. We find the examiner’s interpretation flawed.
Alternatively, the examiner maintains that “all Java byte code, Java Applets are down
loaded for execution.” (See answer at page 14.) While the compilation may be
intended for all code, Zhang implies that if the code does not verify, then there may be
a security problem and may not compile the code for safety reasons. Therefore, this
finding does not appear to be true for all code and the examiner’s position is not
persuasive.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007