Appeal No. 2006-0933
Application No. 09/740,400
stated in the Briefs. The Examiner has primarily relied upon the
disclosure in column 13 of He which describes the initialization of
single sign-on (SSO) capability for a user, the initialization task
being performed by a super user. While it is indisputable that a
password is being changed during this process, we find no support
in this section, or elsewhere, in He for the Examiner’s assertion
that the password being changed is a single sign-on password. As
such, it is our view that the Examiner’s argument (Answer, page 11)
that, since the super user in He has SSO capability, it must follow
that the initialization process disclosed in column 13 of He must
involve an SSO password change can only be based on unwarranted
speculation. It is further our view that even assuming, arguendo,
that the password being changed in He is a first single sign-on
password, there is no disclosure that this password change involves
the creation of a second single sign-on password, a feature present
in each of the independent claims on appeal.
In view of the above discussion, since all of the claim
limitations are not present in the disclosure of He, we do not
sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of independent
claims 1, 20, and 39, nor of claims 2-14, 21-33, and 40-52
dependent thereon.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007