Appeal No. 2004-0499
Application No. 09/251,789
According to the Examiner (Answer, pages 3, 4, 8, and 9),
Appellants’ original disclosure lacks a description of the
automatic operations set forth in the claims as “automatically
assembling,” in relation to the assembling of a list of network
addresses, and “automatically querying,” in relation to querying
software applications for version information. After reviewing
Appellants’ original disclosure in light of the arguments of
record, we are in agreement with the Examiner’s position as
stated in the Answer.
Appellants’ arguments in response (Brief, pages 6 and 7;
Reply Brief, pages 3-5) make reference to the portion of the
original disclosure at pages 7, lines 4-21. Although Appellants
contend that this cited portion of the specification, which is
directed to the querying of peer client applications from a list
of IP addresses, supports their position, we do not find this
persuasive. In our view, the referenced portion of Appellants’
specification merely describes the querying of client
applications for version information from a list of addresses
which each peer client possesses. We find no disclosure in this
cited portion, or elsewhere in Appellants’ specification, that
would describe the “automatic” querying or assembling recited in
the claim language. Further, although the cited portion at page
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007