Appeal 2007-0930
Application 10/014,763
1 As shown above, Examiner would point out that Appellant used
2 relative terms in the specification for defining/explaining the
3 computational efficiency. Terms like, "fast", "shorter amount of time",
4 "less computational complexity'' are used in the specification and such
5 terms are relative terms which need to be some how quantified,
6 otherwise it would not be clear for one of ordinary skill in the art to
7 determine with out ambiguity the extent/degree of how
8 fast/slow/less/short the computational efficiency should be in order to
9 be compatible with computational resources of the user device. The
10 office understood the difficulty of quantifying such terms; the point
11 however is, if such terms are not determined and assigned some
12 values, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to understand
13 the limitation presented in the dependent claim 2. Therefore the
14 Rejection under 35 USC § 112 given for dependent claim 2 is proper
15 and is maintained by the office.
16
17 (Same response provided for claims 2 and 3, Answer 11, 12)
18
19 Initially, we note that Appellants’ arguments on pages 4 through 5 of
20 the Brief do separately address claims 2 and 3, however, Appellants’
21 rationale in each argument is the same, thus the issue is dispositive of the
22 rejection of claims 2 and 3. Appellants’ arguments do not address claims 4
23 through 8 which depend upon claim 3, thus we group claims 4 through 8
24 with claim 3 see 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
25 Thus, Appellants contentions present us with the issue of whether the
26 claim 2 recitation of “a first digital signature protocol having a
27 computational efficiency compatible with computational resources of the
28 user device” and the claim 3 recitation of “second digital signature protocol
29 having a computational efficiency lower than that of the first digital
30 signature” clearly delineate the scope of the invention.
31
32
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013