Appeal 2007-0558
Application 09/940,462
includes "translation of the XML vocabulary into the necessary
SNMP command.'' Id. (Answer 10.)
The Appellants argue that "there is no discussion in P
'045 of any automation equipment including 'at least one WEB
service or one WEB client which are capable of interacting with
the program of the automation equipment, of decoding
messages received from the IP network encoded according to
the SOAP protocol and of encoding according to the SOAP
protocol messages to be sent on the IP network.'" (Appeal Br.
6.) Therefore, the issue is whether the Examiner has shown that
the Provisional '045 supports the functions of the claimed WEB
service or WEB client.
In addressing the issue, the Board conducts a two-step analysis. First,
we construe the independent claims at issue to determine their scope.
Second, we determine whether the construed claims are supported.
III. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
"The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) must consider all claim
limitations when determining patentability of an invention over the prior
art." In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1582, 32 USPQ2d 1031, 1034 (Fed. Cir.
1994) (citing In re Gulack, 703 F.2d 1381, 1385, 217 USPQ 401, 403-04
(Fed. Cir. 1983)). Here, claim 1 recites in pertinent part the following
limitations:
in the automation equipment, at least one WEB service or one
WEB client which are capable of interacting with the program
of the automation equipment, of decoding messages received
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013