Appeal 2006-2723
Application 09/891,264
We also observe that Appellant equates the word “contain” with
“encapsulate” based on sending the service component to the service
computer in the same container or another container (Request 4). The
reusable software modules of Yates also allow for reconfigurability of the
agent by selecting new combination of modules (Abstract). Therefore, the
policies that are loaded at run-time and are external to the modules provide
for the service component that may be included or encapsulated in any of the
modules.
Accordingly, based on the state of the prior art as a whole, we remain
of the opinion that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in
the art to combine Yates with Beck to provide for the software modules with
individual blocks of code contained or included in the modules.
In conclusion, based on the foregoing, we have granted Appellant’s
request to the extent that we have reconsidered our decision, but we deny
Appellant’s request to make any change therein.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013