Appeal No. 2006-2336
Application No. 09/849,916
specified events. However, the ordinarily skilled artisan would
have realized that Henrikson’ teachings do not go to the extent
of calculating field values for packets in a selected frame.
Particularly, the ordinarily skilled artisan would have duly
realized that Hendrikson’s teaching of translating user-specified
events into digital data to capture corresponding packets on the
bus is not equivalent to the claimed calculation of field values
for packets in a selected frame. This stems from the fact that
calculating the value field of a data packet based upon
identified codes is not equivalent to translating data that
matches a data packet. In our view, the Examiner has overly
stretched the teachings of Henrikson in a desperate attempt to
make a prima facie case of anticipation against representative
claimed 1, even as broad claimed. Consequently, we find error in
the Examiner’s stated position, which concludes that Henrikson
teaches the use of a text file to identify function codes for a
selected frame, wherein the identified codes are subsequently
used to calculate the field values for each data packet in a
selected frame. Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 1 through 11, 13 through 16 and 18 through
20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007