Ex Parte NUXOLL et al - Page 2




              Appeal No. 2002-0275                                                                                      
              Application No. 09/215,752                                                                                

                                                   BACKGROUND                                                           
                     The invention relates to an object-oriented system in which, when an object is                     
              created, a Meta Data Service creates and stores a meta definition for the object.                         
              Applications query for the meta definition of the object before proceeding with                           
              processing of the object.  The applications thus do not need to understand the definition                 
              or structure of an object.  Claim 1 is reproduced below.                                                  
                     1.     A method in a software component for processing a data object in a data                     
                     processing system, said method comprising the computer-implemented steps of:                       
                            sending a query for a meta definition of a data object;                                     
                            receiving the meta definition for the data object;                                          
                            identifying object attributes in the meta definition; and                                   
                            prompting a user to input data values corresponding to the object                           
                            attributes.                                                                                 
                     The examiner relies on the following reference:                                                    
              Maruyama et al. (Maruyama)                       5,710,920            Jan. 20, 1998                       
                                                                             (filed Dec. 23, 1994)                      
                     Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 13, 14, 16, 18-20, 22, 24-35, 37, 40, 42, and 46 stand                      
              rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Maruyama.                                          
                     Claims 4, 6, 11, 12, 36, 38, 39, 41, 43-45, and 47 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                  
              § 103 as being unpatentable over Maruyama and “well known prior art.”                                     
                     Claims 3, 8, 9, 15, 17, 21, and 23 have been canceled.                                             

                                                          -2-                                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007