Appeal No. 2004-2127 Page 8
Application No. 09/441,693
of the road" are admittedly unwritten, however, the examiner's conclusion of
obviousness is not based on any evidence in the record but rather on what may be
basic knowledge or common sense to one of ordinary skill in the art. Absent a teaching
or suggestion of determining, for each of at least two consecutive time windows,
whether a network complies with an SLA and, for each of the windows, accruing a
negative revenue increment for each unit of offered bandwidth lost while the network is
noncompliant, we are unpersuaded of a prima facie case of obviousness. Therefore,
we reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 2 and 3.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claims 2 and 3 under § 103(a) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007