Appeal No. 2002-0288
Application No. 08/883,241
citing column 1, lines 35-37, of Hughes.
Appellants argue that while Sanderman may teach viewing a
hierarchical nodal structure (for example, in Figure 4, showing a
display, the contents of folder 204d are displayed, including
leaf nodes “movie Chat Room,” etc.) at local computer 102,
Sanderman does not teach designating a deepest node level of the
tree structure. It is argued that by designating a deepest node
level in the instant invention, only a selected number of
documents are downloaded into the memory of the local computer
system, i.e., only the documents in the nodes on levels that are
in and between the root node and the node of the deepest level so
designated, and so download time and memory space on the local
computer system are conserved.
Appellants also argue that Sanderman fails to teach
“downloading, into the memory of the local computer system,
documents in the nodes on levels that are in and between the root
node and the node at the deepest node level.” Appellants state
that, contrary to the examiner’s position, Hughes does not teach
this limitation and, even if it did, it would result in all of
the network information being downloaded to the local computer
because Hughes does not designate a deepest node level of the
-7–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007