Appeal No. 2005-2329
Application No. 09/738,293
Telephone Network (STN).” Claim 1 recites a collaboration services unit
that communicates over such a network. The team member interface is
adapted to communicate between members by this collaboration services
suite over the same STN. Thus, it is clear that the same network is utilized
for both specifically recited communications. As such, we observe that the
claimed STN is not claimed to be a Public Switched Telephone Network or
PSTN.
Appellants’ comments at the bottom of page 7 of the brief recognize
as the examiner does that Tang teaches essentially all of what is set forth
in the subject matter of claim 1 on appeal, but begins to argue at page 8
that the reference does not teach that the support communications is over
the STN. With this we strongly disagree as well as with the additional
assertion there that Tang teaches away from utilizing such a network by
only discussing the use of a PC network. Appellants also later at page 10
of the brief argue that there is no teaching or suggestion or motivation to
combine the teachings of Tang and Klein. Again, we strongly disagree with
this view.
Whatever types of networks are aptly characterized in the prior art
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007