Appeal No. 2002-0340
Application No. 09/094,827
obvious to download a program needed for interpreting data along with the data in order
to ensure that the system receiving the data has the interpreter necessary for utilizing
the data. While the examiner points out that Choudhury does not specifically indicate
that the interpreter transferred with the data is a multiplatform interpreter, the examiner
concludes that it would have been obvious to transfer a multiplatform interpreter to a
system for decrypting the data that is transferred from a different system in order to
make it available on the receiving system. The examiner contends that it would
have been obvious “to ensure Compatibility between the two systems to ensure
That transferred data is readily available for use On the receiving system...” (Final
Rejection-page 3).
It is our view that the examiner’s rationale falls far short of establishing a prima
facie case of obviousness of the instant claimed subject matter in view of Skidmore and
Choudhury.
In particular, the examiner has found obvious, without any specific teaching or
suggestion in any of the applied references, a crucial part of appellant’s claimed
invention. That is, appellant’s use of a “multiplatform interpreter” permits delivery of the
same application program, created for an abstract machine, to different platforms and
interpretation of this same application program at different platforms by using the same
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007