Ex Parte KITAJIMA et al - Page 3




          Appeal No. 2003-0285                                                        
          Application No. 08/814,409                                                  


                    reading change data from a remote computer via a                  
               communication network, for changing the encrypting                     
               specifications; and                                                    
                    automatically generating change data for changing                 
               the encrypting specification; and                                      
                    automatically changing a circuit structure of the                 
               at least one programmable logic device corresponding to the            
               change data without removal of the at least one programmable           
               logic device from the encrypting circuit.                              
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Dabbish                  4,972,478                Nov. 20, 1990             
          Lynn et al. (Lynn)       5,345,508                Sep.  6, 1994             
          Knapp et al. (Knapp)     5,499,192                Mar. 12, 1996             
          Microsoft Press® Computer Dictionary, pp. 337-38 (Microsoft                 
          Corp., 3rd Ed., 1997).                                                      
               Claims 23 through 31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)           
          as being anticipated by Dabbish.                                            
               Claims 1 through 4, 6 through 8, 10 through 13, 15 through             
          17 and 19 through 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as             
          being unpatentable over Dabbish in view of Knapp and the                    
          Microsoft Computer Dictionary.                                              
               Claims 9 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as             
          being unpatentable over Dabbish in view of Knapp and Lynn.                  






                                          3                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007