Appeal No. 2002-2056
Application No. 09/152,471
system, and concludes that it would have been obvious, within the
meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103, to
combine MACDONALD’s teachings, which already include
the mathematical manipulation of schedule variances
between planned and actual project parameters, with the
teachings of MARTIN by adding correlation of data to
the analyses of planned and actual project variance.
Adding correlation analyses would have provided the
many benefits suggested by MARTIN, including making
reasonable forecasts. Reasonable forecasts improve
project management by providing management with better
data upon which to base staffing and delivery schedules
[answer, page 4].
We agree with appellants that neither of the applied
references discloses or suggests a correlation between different
pairs of parameters, as claimed.
It is clear that MacDonald is interested only in variances
between projected and actual values of parameters with no
additional analysis being performed. The examiner does not
disagree. The dispute centers around what Martin is alleged to
disclose.
The examiner relies on language at page 4 of the Martin
reference, wherein Martin states that a format “provides for the
correlation of all data (quantities; hours; and dollars for
labor, material, and services) with the least expenditure of
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007