Appeal No. 2002-0364
Application No. 08/951,812
class corresponds to the second class and wherein the reference
attribute in the first class includes a type and cardinality. It
is true that Martin discusses cardinality, in general, e.g., at
page 83, but there is no indication, within the cited portion of
Martin, that this cardinality is included in a reference
attribute of a first class and that this reference attribute
corresponds to a second class, as claimed.
We also do not find, and the examiner has not particularly
pointed to anything in Martin which discloses step c of instant
claim 36. If there is no teaching of a first and second class in
Martin, it seems to follow that there is no teaching of
“associating” objects of the first class to objects of the second
class using the reference attributes, as claimed.
While there may, theoretically, be a way for the skilled
artisan to reach the instant claimed subject matter from a
reading of, and application of the principles discussed in, the
Martin textbook, such a conclusion is speculative, at best, and a
conclusion of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 may not be based
on speculation. It was up to the examiner, in the first
instance, to specifically point out where each and every step and
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007