Appeal No. 2003-0513 Page 3
Application No. 08/655,879
Claims 10-13, 15-18, 20-22, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as
anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,499,364 ("Klein").
OPINION
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellants in toto, we
focus on a point of contention therebetween. Based on a premise that "[i]t is the status
of the sender event, including both local events and external events, instead of local
events alone, that Klein uses to decide whether to send a notification," (Examiner's
Answer at 7), the examiner makes the following assertion.
Appellant's first component as claimed is met by the local agent of Klein
having the local event, the second component as claimed by the external
agent having the external event that depends on the local event ("receiver
event"), and the third component as claimed by the external sender agent
triggering the final truth value for the TrueCondition or FalseCondition of
the receiving external event ("receiver event").
(Id.) The appellants argue, "the only delay of Klein occurs based on local events within
a sending agent and not the state of a third agent." (Appeal Br. at 8.)
In addressing the point of contention, the Board conducts a two-step analysis.
First, we construe the independent claims at issue to determine their scope. Second,
we determine whether the construed claims are anticipated.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007