Appeal No. 2003-0640
Application No. 09/507,261
silent as to how its nodes make an active response, if any, to
receipt of an invalidate message. Therefore, Appellants'
arguments are persuasive and we will not sustain the Examiner's
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Other Issues
At the earliest appropriate point, the Examiner should
address whether apparatus claim 18 is a proper 35 U.S.C. § 112,
sixth paragraph claim. If claim 18 does not enjoy protection
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph as being "for a
combination," then the Examiner should address the issue of
whether a "single means" rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph is appropriate. See In re Hyatt, 708 F.2d 712, 714-
715, 218 USPQ 195, 197 (Fed. Cir. 1983), and see the Manual of
Patent Examining Procedure § 2164.08(a).
Conclusion
In summary, we have not sustained any of the Examiner's
rejections of the claims on appeal. Therefore, the decision of
the Examiner rejecting claims 1, 2, 4-15, 17 and 18 is reversed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007