Appeal No. 2002-1686
Application No. 09/188,680
277 F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002). With
these principles in mind, we commence review of the pertinent
evidence and arguments of Appellants and Examiner.
Appellants argue that claim 1 requires loading detailed
records of interconnect calls into a table and a database and
processing the detailed records in the database table to form a
report of interconnect call traffic crossing the interface
between the telecommunication networks which involves the process
of enhancing the detailed records in the database and loading the
enhanced detailed records into an on-line analytical processing
system. Appellants also argue that claim 1 recites that the
processing involves running a pre-defined study application in
the on-line analytical processing system to present specified
analytical study results based on the enhanced detailed records.
See page 13 of Appellants' brief.
On pages 5 and 6 of the Examiner's answer, the Examiner
states
Brinkman et al failed to teach where the detailed
records are loaded into a table in a database; and
process the detailed records in the database to form a
report of the call traffic in the telecommunication
network. However, Karras et al teach a method for
generating billing records comprising of loading a
plurality of detailed records of the plurality of
interconnect calls into a table in a database (col. 14
line 63 to col. 16 line 56); and processing the
77
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007