Appeal No. 2007-0695 Page 6
Application No. 09/837,041
DATATYPE="YEAR"></STRING></MODEL>
<ATTDEF NAME=:schema:iso8601" DATATYPE="CDATA">
<FIXED>3.8
Gregorian calendar</FIXED></ATTDEF></ELEMENTTYPE>
. . .
______________________________________
We are unable to find any explicit mention of element (b) in Fig. 9 or
column 32, lines 12-55 of Meltzer. Moreover, without more explanation, we are
unable to understand how these disclosures inherently describe metadata which
comprises a plurality of metadata instances each configured to support a different
request protocol. Appellants made this same point in their briefs (see Appeal Br.
11-13 and Reply Br.4 3-4). The Examiner responded to Appellants’ concern by
stating, in part, that “there must be metadata produced to define what the
relationship is since the data needs to be transformed back to the original format
when sent to the requestor (13115).” Answer 6. The Examiner did not further
elaborate. The Examiner should have.
4 Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed Sep. 11, 2006).
5 Refers to element 1311 (“Convert to Document”) in Fig. 13 reproduced below:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013