Appeal No. 2002-1109
Application 09/316,436
of Fig. 2 to the relational database to retrieve data from the
database (col. 5, lines 46-51).
The examiner finds (FR3; EA3):
With respect to claim 1, Haegele teaches a method for
facilitating the access of data using user-defined attributes,
comprising the following steps:
(a) storing attributes (col. 1 lines 12-36) in a first
logging segment (Fig. 1), entries for the attributes
containing information which indicates subordinate
relationships between attributes, the subordinate
relationships creating an attribute structure (col. 1
lines 12 to col. 2 lines 67);
(b) when a user stores a data lot, allowing the user to
specify one or more attributes to be linked to the data lot
(col. 6 lines 1-14); and
(c) storing in a second logging element (Fig. 2),
entries which show links from data lots to attributes
(col. 3 lines 62 to col. 4 lines 60).
Examiner interprets indents as attributes, First
logging segment as a [sic, an] Apparel under Men's (Suits,
Casual, Shoes) (Fig. 1), Second logging segment CSOID
(Apparel, Men's, Suits, Casual, Shoes) (Fig. 2)
Appellant argues that Haegele discloses none of the steps
set out in claim 1. As to step (a), it is argued that there are
no entries for indents that contain information that indicates
subordinate relationships between indents (Br7). It is argued
that indents are shown as empty spaces in Fig. 1 and Haegele does
not include separate entries for indents and does not contain
information that indicates subordinate relationships between
indents (Br7).
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007