Appeal No. 2006-1597
Application No. 09/218,822
with regard to the Examiner’s rejection based on Riggins, each of the appealed independent
claims 1, 14, and 20 sets forth a specific combination involving a media manager, which, inter
alia, operates to export configuration interfaces, a capture manager, and a controller which
communicates over exported internal interfaces. While the Examiner (Answer, pages 5, 6, and
13-16) makes reference to various portions of the applied Khosla and Anderson references in
asserting that the claimed features are allegedly disclosed by the prior art, the Examiner has made
no attempt to explain how the features described in the references correspond to the claimed
features, let alone how such features might interact in the specific manner set forth in the
appealed claims.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007