Appeal No. 2002-2126
Application 08/931,187
process can be in the form of a characterization process
(col. 10, lines 49-50) as well as an encryption algorithm
(col. 5, lines 65-67; col. 10, lines 64-66).
Arguments not made have not been addressed. See 37 CFR
§ 1.192(c)8)(iv) (1990) (arguments must be made in the brief).
Appellant has not shown error in the finding of
anticipation. The rejection of claims 1, 3-5, 10, 12, 13, and
15-34 is sustained.
Dependent claim 2
Appellant argues that Borza does not disclose that "the
selected security algorithm encodes and decodes information
communicated between the server and client" in claim 2 and
"[t]here is no disclosure anywhere from Borza '167 of any
selected security algorithm" (Br21).
Borza discloses that a "security process" transmitted to the
client can be an encryption algorithm (col. 5, lines 65-67),
which necessarily encodes information. Inherently, the server
must contain a complementary decryption algorithm to decode the
encrypted information. Appellant has not shown error in the
rejection. The rejection of claim 2 is sustained.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007