Appeal No. 2003-0360
Application No. 08/947,032
terms of the claim language, what does it mean to say that an
archiving condition, i.e., whether to archive or not, is used to
determine whether to archive? There appears to be a redundancy,
or double-talk, in such an analysis. Further, it would appear
awkward to say that the archiving process is triggered in order
to archive a document if the date (attribute) satisfies the
condition that the document should be archived, yet this is how
the instant claim language would read if we adopted the
examiner’s definition of the claimed “condition” to be a “check
being made whether archived or not archived” and of the claimed
“attribute” to be the “date”of the diary entry.
It is our view that the examiner has completely
reconstructed the instant claimed invention from Blandford by
employing totally unwarranted and impermissible hindsight gleaned
from appellants’ own disclosure. This is not a proper basis,
within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. §103, for a conclusion of
obviousness.
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007