Appeal No. 2002-0145
Application No. 09/090,990
30-31 of the principal brief, combining these teachings “would
not be logical . . . because the two teachings are incompatible.”
Appellant bases this conclusion on the assessment that Tang’s
mechanism is meant to adapt to differing transmission media and
combining this with Pallmann would destroy the purpose of Tang’s
mechanism by making the delivery system incompatible with
differing transmission media.
The examiner takes an opposing view, urging that the
inclusion of Pallmann’s plug-ins into the system of Tang would
not destroy the purpose of the Tang system but would have allowed
senders of electronic messages to convert the messages into a
form which is understood by the recipient, while being compatible
with the “transmission media” (information format) of the
recipient, referring to column 1, lines 55-58, of Tang and column
7, line 63 through column 8, line 4 of Pallmann (see pages 15-16
of the answer).
The examiner also notes that both Tang and Pallmann comprise
teachings which deal directly with data conversion to a format
able to be processed by a recipient so that the teachings are
compatible.
We have attempted to follow the examiner’s reasoning but,
frankly, we do not understand how and/or why the examiner
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007