Appeal No. 2006-1225
Application No. 10/244,825
switches in Ogata allows data to pass to the storage device
(answer, sentence bridging pages 5-6). In other words, the
Examiner takes the position that the switch that allows data to
pass, is considered as being grouped with the storage device
(answer, page 6).
A rejection for anticipation requires that the four corners
of a single prior art document describe every element of the
claimed invention, either expressly or inherently, such that a
person of ordinary skill in the art could practice the invention
without undue experimentation. See Atlas Powder Co. v. Ireco
Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, 1347, 51 USPQ2d 1943, 1946 (Fed. Cir. 1999);
In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1478-79, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1673 (Fed.
Cir. 1994).
Initially, we note that the claims clearly require “grouping
a switch and the storage device included in the storage system”
which allows data to only pass to the storage device from that
switch. Therefore, we remain unconvinced by the Examiner’s
position that the claim may include more than one switch such
that it reads on the alternate switches of Ogata. Upon a review
of Ogata, we find that the switches SW1A/SW2A and SW1B/SAW2B
limit access from computers 1A and 1B to the storage device by
alternating their access (paragraphs 0014, 0022). In that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007