Appeal 2007-0789
Application 09/810,063
receiving, by the user computer system, a response packet from the
second computer system, wherein the response packet includes the high
priority header, in response to the sending; and
calculating, by a billing computer system associated with the network
service provider, a usage amount, wherein the usage amount includes an
amount of time that the user computer system uses the priority network
service.
A. Issue
The issue is whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting the claims over the prior art on the ground that neither Odlyzko nor Saari
nor a combination of the two teaches or suggests all the limitations of Appellants’
claimed method, namely the second thru fifth steps.
B. Facts
The record supports the following findings of fact (FF) by a preponderance
of the evidence.
Claim construction
1. The claimed method comprises five steps.
2. The first step involves a network service provider determining that a user
computer has requested priority network service.
3. According to the second step, once that determination is made, the network
service provider writes a high priority header to a packet originating from the user
computer.
4. According to the third step, the packet with the written high priority header
is sent from the user computer to a second computer connected to a network.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013