Appeal No. 2002-1527 Page 7 Application No. 08/885,817 (Fed. Cir. 1984); Connell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 722 F.2d 1542, 1548, 220 USPQ 193, 198 (Fed. Cir. 1983); Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 713 F.2d760, 771, 218 USPQ 781, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1983)). Here, Aziz describes "communication between a node I coupled to private network 22, and a node J coupled to the private network 30, as shown in FIG. 2." Col. 6, ll. 59-61. The reference explains that nodes I and J can operate as "firewall machines coupled between their respective networks and the Internet 20." Col. 7, ll. 3- 4. "For a description of . . . firewalls," id. at ll. 4-5, Aziz refers to and "incorporate[s] fully . . . by reference,"5 col. 1, ll. 12-13, a patent application, which is now U.S. Patent No. 5,416,842 ("'842 Patent"). Teaching that "firewalls (FWA) and (FWB) represent computers, such as the computer illustrated in FIG. 1," col. 5, ll. 34-37, the '842 Patent explains that each firewall "includes a central processing (CPU) 13. . . ." Col. 4, ll. 46- 47. "Coupl[ing] the computers of a private network to the Internet 20," '842 Patent, col. 4, l. 67 - col. 5, l. 1, each firewall "may thus act as a gatekeeper for messages and 5"[A]n application may . . . incorporate the content of another document or part thereof by reference to the document in the text of the specification. The information incorporated is as much a part of the application as filed as if the text was repeated in the application, and should be treated as part of the text of the application as filed." M.P.E.P. § 2163.07(b) (8th ed., rev. 1 Feb. 2003).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007