Ex Parte Childs et al - Page 3

                 Appeal 2007-0901                                                                                      
                 Application 10/063,402                                                                                
                 Batten-Carew   5,968,177   Oct   19,  1999                                                            
                 Davis    6,181,803 B1  Jan.   30,  2001                                                               

                        The rejections as presented by the Examiner are as follows:                                    
                     1. Claims 5-7, 9-13, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as                          
                        being anticipated by Batten-Carew.                                                             
                     2. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as unpatentable over                              
                        Batten-Carew.                                                                                  
                     3. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as unpatentable over                               
                        Batten-Carew and Davis.                                                                        

                                                     OPINION                                                           
                        The Examiner finds instant claim 5 to be anticipated by Batten-Carew.                          
                 Appellants submit that the reference fails to disclose isolating administrative                       
                 access to a plurality of client systems in a computer network via a data                              
                 center.                                                                                               
                        Appellants acknowledge (Appeal Br. 4-5) that Batten-Carew discloses                            
                 at column 7, lines 8 through 15 that the serving entity 12 (Fig. 1) processes                         
                 administrative requests from administrative entities 16, 18.  At step 108 (Fig.                       
                 3), the processed request is then provided either to the administrative entity                        
                 that initiated the request or directly to the end-user.  Batten-Carew teaches                         
                 that typically the processed request will be provided to the administrative                           
                 entity, which will subsequently provide the information to the end-user.                              
                 Appellants conclude from this description that the reference fails to meet the                        
                 terms of the claim because Batten-Carew “in the same embodiment” teaches                              
                 that the administrative request “can also be” provided back to the                                    
                 administrative entity.                                                                                

                                                          3                                                            

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013