Appeal No. 2003-0319
Application No. 09/206,663 Page 4
inherently. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d
1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997). As stated in In re Oelrich, 666
F.2d 578, 581, 212 USPQ 323, 326 (CCPA 1981) (quoting Hansgirg v.
Kemmer, 102 F.2d 212, 214, 40 USPQ 665, 667 (CCPA 1939))
(internal citations omitted):
Inherency, however, may not be established by
probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a
certain thing may result from a given set of
circumstances is not sufficient. If, however, the
disclosure is sufficient to show that the natural
result flowing from the operation as taught would
result in the performance of the questioned function,
it seems to be well settled that the disclosure should
be regarded as sufficient.
Appellant asserts (brief, page 4) that Risberg does not
disclose the function of responding to an event to execute
processes for all queries having constraints satisfied by a data
source. Appellant further asserts (id.) that Risberg discloses
scripted commands executed in sequence, not concurrently.
Appellant acknowledges (id.) that Risberg discloses an event
driven publish/subscribe architecture similar to the claimed
invention, and notes that in Risberg, scripted commands can be
executed if the data field exceeds a limit. Appellant argues
that as set forth in independent claims 1 and 11, the claimed
invention receives complex queries which are declarative and not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007