Appeal No. 2002-1844
Application 08/975,428
Claims 1, 3-22, 29-31, 33-35, and 37 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hyodo or Gerace.
Claims 28 and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Hyodo in view of Dedrick or Gerace in
view of Hyodo.
We refer to the final rejection (Paper No. 24) (pages
referred to as "FR__") and the examiner's answer (Paper No. 29)
for a statement of the examiner's rejection, and to the appeal
brief (Paper No. 28) (pages referred to as "Br__") for a
statement of appellants' arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Hyodo
Claims 1, 3-15, 29-31 and 37
The examiner reads steps (a), (b), and (c) on column 3,
lines 38-67 of Hyodo, and reads step (d) on column 2, lines 39-46
of Hyodo (FR4; EA3-4). The examiner finds that Hyodo does not
expressly disclose that the structuring and storing of data
elements in step (c) includes "parsing, categorizing, indexing,
and formatting the data elements," but "Official Notice is taken
that it is [sic, was] old and well known within the database arts
that incoming data must be transformed into the appropriate
format before being stored in a database" (FR5; EA4) and
concludes that "[o]ne [of ordinary skill in the art] would have
been motivated to parse, categorize, index, and map incoming data
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007