Appeal 2007-0719
Application 09/731,205
the invention, to look to particular sources, to select particular elements, and
to combine them as combined by the inventor. Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 234
F.3d 654, 665, 57 USPQ2d 1161, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
“[A]n implicit motivation to combine exists not only when a suggestion
may be gleaned from the prior art as a whole, but when the ‘improvement’ is
technology-independent and the combination of references results in a
product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger,
cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient . . . .
In such situations, the proper question is whether the ordinary artisan
possesses knowledge and skills rendering him capable of combining the
prior art references.” DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v.
C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1368, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir.
2006).
ANALYSIS
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) REJECTION
Claims 1 through 6
As set forth above, independent claim 1 recites, inter alia, (A) an
interface controller in direct communication with the document processing
device, (B) control data communicated between the network interface and
the document processing device, and (C) the interface controller being in
parallel communication with the document processing device and the
document processing device controller. As detailed in the findings of fact
section above, we have found that Sorkin teaches that in subsequent
communications, the client can bypass the server to directly communicate
with the printer. The client exchanges control data directly with the printer
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013