Appeal No. 2003-0483
Application No. 09/375,429
this means that two node addresses may have the exact same node address provided
they are located in different domains. Appellants contrast this teaching by Gervais with
the instant invention which requires the device identity to be globally unique so that no
two devices may have the same identity no matter where they are located.
We agree with the examiner and will sustain the rejection of claims 1-3, 6-8,
11-13 and 16-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
While we understand the differences between the instant disclosed invention and
that which is disclosed by Gervais, the instant invention, as claimed, is, in our view,
much broader than envisioned by appellants.
Since Gervais discloses the receipt of a packet and adds a network layer header,
the network layer address referring to a network number and a node address, the
examiner has reasonably concluded that Gervais discloses the receiving of a packet
that includes identification information that is distinct from location address information.
The network number constitutes identification information and the node address
constitutes location address information and these two pieces of information are distinct
from each other.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007