Appeal No. 2003-0285
Application No. 08/814,409
changes to encrypting/decrypting apparatus (specification, pages
5 and 6), and indicate a preference for hardware circuit changes
to the encrypting/decrypting apparatus (specification, pages
11 through 13, 15, 21 and 23). Dabbish discloses an opposite
approach by stating a preference for software changes to
encrypting/decrypting apparatus to avoid the shortcomings in
encrypting/decrypting apparatus fixed in hardware (column
1, lines 12 through 14; column 2, lines 15 through 63; column 3,
line 41 through column 4, line 9).
Based upon the foregoing, the anticipation rejection of
claims 23 through 31 is reversed because Dabbish’s
encrypting/decrypting circuits are fixed (column 1, lines
12 through 14), and can not be changed by change data from a
changing unit. The obviousness rejections of claims 1 through 4,
6 through 13 and 15 through 22 are reversed because the teachings
of Knapp, the Microsoft Computer Dictionary and Lynn do not
remedy the shortcomings in the teachings of Dabbish.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007