Appeal No. 2001-2106
Application No. 08/856,183
take advantage of the versatility and improved program execution
of Java independent of the operating system (answer, pages 4 &
5).
Appellant argues that, contrary to the Examiner’s
interpretation of the reference, the compatibility described in
JLS is a backward compatibility of each new version of Java with
the existing Java applications (brief, page 5). Additionally,
Appellant points to the listing of HTML, PDF and Postscript on
page 1 of JLS and argues that such “languages” are formats in
which the Java language specifications may be downloaded, not
languages in other systems that are compatible with Java (brief,
pages 4 & 5 and reply brief, pages 1 & 2). Appellant further
questions the reason for the combination of Bertram and JLS and
argues that the motivation to include Java language in such
printers should be ruled out because Bertram provides a complete
system at a time prior to development of Java language (brief,
page 6).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner points to
page 1 of JLS listing HTML, PDF and Postscript for download
formats for concluding that a system using HTML, PDF and
Postscript is compatible with Java since Java accepts such
programs (answer, page 6). The Examiner further argues that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007