Appeal 2007-0789
Application 09/810,063
4. The computer-implemented method as described in claim 1 further
comprising:
receiving, by the network service provider, a request message from
the user computer system, wherein the request message requests that the
priority network service be discontinued; and
writing, by the network service provider, a normal priority header to
one or more packets originating from the user computer system, in response
to receiving the request message.
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 Odlyzko fails to teach or
suggest all the limitations of claim 4.
B. Facts
The record supports the following findings of fact (FF) by a preponderance
of the evidence.
1. We incorporate herein the findings of facts from the Facts section for claims
1-3, 6, 8-10, 13, and 15-17 above.
2. The Examiner found that:
As for Claim 4, the modified method of Odlyzko further discloses the
method including: receiving a request message from the user computer
system, wherein the request message requests that the priority network
service be stopped; and writing a normal priority header to one or more
packets originating from the user computer system (see Fig. 3 for the
precedence and type of service; when the users requests the lower priority
service (from the menu), the precedence field MUST be designated with the
different bits, col. 6, line 65 – col. 7, line 24 of Odlyzko).
(Answer 7).
24
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013