Appeal 2007-0428
Application 10/210,361
entry to enable immediate access to the data. Third, a symptom process
executes codes to determine if the database entry actually applies to the
process. Fourth, a solution process executes codes to modify the state of the
system to implement a solution to the problem. (Id. 5, ll. 3-12). Overall,
when a data set matches those identified by the initialization of the database
entry, the immediate response code for that entry is executed. Then, the
symptom code for that entry is retrieved, loaded, and executed. If the
symptom code indicates that the database entry applies, then the solution
code for the entry is retrieved, loaded, and executed. (Miller 5, ll. 24-28).
Miller also teaches a process for extracting a subset of database
entries from the master knowledge base when solution data for a particular
problem is not readily available in the customer database. Upon
downloading new data entries from the master knowledge base into the
customer knowledge base, the engine uses the updated data in the customer
knowledge base to retrieve a solution for a given problem. (Id. 7, ll. 14-20).
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
ANTICIPATION
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under § 102 can be found
only if the prior art reference discloses every element of the claim. See In re
King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and
Lindemann Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730
F.2d 1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a single prior art reference
that discloses, either expressly or inherently, each limitation of a claim
invalidates that claim by anticipation. Perricone v. Medicis Pharmaceutical
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013