Appeal 2006-3356
Application 10/244,722
which may use Web technology that includes HTML or XML elements and
Web browsers.
A principal issue in this case is whether Najmi describes, as recited in
representative claim 29, an MFS XML adapter and an MFS message output
descriptor within the meaning of the claims.
According to Appellants’ specification, MFS is a facility of the IMS
(information management system) transaction management environment that
formats messages to and from many types of terminal devices -- i.e.,
message format service-based information system applications, or MFS-
based IMS applications. (Specification 1:14-17.) The Examiner finds that
Najmi’s system provides the same functionality of the MFS adapter as
claimed. The Examiner further finds that Najmi’s B2B schema provides the
same functionality as the MFS output descriptor that is claimed. (Answer 4-
5.) Appellants state that “[a]ll structural and functional equivalents to the
elements of the above-described preferred embodiment that are known or
later come to be known to those of ordinary skill in the art are expressly
incorporated herein by reference and are intended to be encompassed by the
present claims.” (Specification 17:10-13.)
Appellants contend, and the Examiner does not dispute, that Najmi
does not contain the literal language “MFS adapter” or “MFS message
output descriptor.” Appellants have not, however, persuasively explained
why the systems described by Najmi are not functionally equivalent to the
claimed “adapter” or “descriptor.”
Claim 29 has been rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Najmi. The claim recites receiving a client request from a
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013