Appeal No. 2004-2099
Application No. 09/487,191
References
The references relied on by the Examiner are as follows:
Fayyad et al. (Fayyad) 6,115,708 Sep. 5, 2000
(filed Mar. 4, 1998)
"A Modified Random Perturbation Method for Database Security;"
Tendick and Matloff (Tendick); ACM Trans. on Database Systems,
Vol. 19, No. 1, March 1994, Pages 47-63.
Rejections At Issue
Claims 1-13 and 20-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103
as being obvious over the combination of Fayyad and Tendick.
Throughout our opinion, we make references to the
Appellants' briefs, and to the Examiner's Answer for the
respective details thereof.1
OPINION
With full consideration being given to the subject matter on
appeal, the Examiner's rejections and the arguments of the
Appellants and the Examiner, for the reasons stated infra, we
reverse the Examiner's rejection of claims 1-6 and 20-22 under
35 U.S.C. § 103; and we affirm the Examiner's rejection of claims
7-13 and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Appellants have indicated that for purposes of this appeal
all the claims stand or fall together in a single group. See
1 Appellants filed an appeal brief on August 15, 2002. Appellants
filed a reply brief on December 3, 2002. The Examiner mailed an
Examiner's Answer on November 6, 2002.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007