Appeal No. 2002-2013
Application 09/036,699
22. A network comprising:
a first platform and a second platform;
said platforms being adapted to parse a list of URLs from a
requested network data object and to pre-fetch via said network
connection said URLs to a remote proxy server.
24. An article comprising:
a machine readable storage medium having stored thereon
instructions capable of being executed by a data processing
platform, said instructions being adapted to parse a list of URLs
from a received network data object and to pre-fetch via a network
connection said URLs to a remote platform in accordance with a
pre-determined pre-fetching policy.
Discussion
A. The Anticipation Rejection
To establish anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102, each and every element and limitation in
a claim, arranged as is recited in the claim, must be found in a single prior art reference. Karsten
Mfg. Corp. v. Cleveland Golf Co., 242 F.3d 1376, 1383, 58 USPQ2d 1286, 1291 (Fed. Cir.
2001); see also Glaxo, Inc. v. Novopharm, Ltd., 52 F.3d 1043, 1047, 34 USPQ2d 1565, 1567
(Fed. Cir. 1995). The examiner has rejected claims 24 and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Barrett. Claim 26 depends from claim 24 and thus includes all the limitations of
claim 24. Claim 24 specifically requires stored instructions executable on a data processing
platform, which are adapted (1) to parse a list of URLs from a received network data object and
(2) to pre-fetch via a network connection the URLs to a remote platform in accordance with a
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007