Appeal No. 2002-1398
Application No. 08/572,474
We do not find appellants’ arguments regarding claim 6 to be
persuasive. In view of the examiner’s apparently reasonable
assessment that the object instance handle of Travis is an
identification means for finding/activating an object, as
described in the Invoker Operation portions of Travis, apparently
meeting the key/object key limitation of the claims, and in view
of the examiner’s assessment that the object instance handle of
Travis includes several components, namely, <class>,
<storage_class>, <location>. <instance_reference_data>, meeting
the language of claim 6, appellants’ mere general allegations
that they “do not believe that the instance handle discussed in
Travis is equivalent to a key” and that “there is no mention in
the applied portion of Travis1 of component keys (ckeys)” are not
persuasive of unobviousness.
We have sustained the rejection of claims 4-6, 8, 9, 13-18,
20-25, 27, 28 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. §103 but we have not
sustained the rejection of claims 11 and 29 under 35 U.S.C. §103.
1We note that appellants do not argue that Travis nowhere
discloses the claimed component keys, only that the “applied
portion” of Travis does not disclose such.
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007