Appeal 2007-0375
Application 09/886,186
In response to the second ground of rejection, Appellants rely on the
same arguments that we find unpersuasive relating to the alleged deficient
teachings of Acharya and Pettey. Appellants further contend that Karpoff
“does not teach passing data from the host channel adapter directly to an
Internet Protocol router or the router being connected directly to the host
channel adapter.” (Br. 13.) We agree that Karpoff does not contain the
teaching, but Acharya does. As such, we are not persuaded that claims 26,
32, and 38 have been rejected in error. We sustain the § 103(a) rejection of
the claims as unpatentable over Acharya, Pettey, and Karpoff.
CONCLUSION
In summary, we affirm the rejection of claims 1-42 under 35 U.S.C
§ 103(a).
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this
appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
rwk
IBM CORP (YA)
C/O YEE & ASSOCIATES PC
P.O. BOX 802333
DALLAS TX 75380
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: September 9, 2013