Appeal 2007-1063
Application 09/881,594
ISSUE
The principal issue in the appeal before us is whether the Appellant
has shown that the Examiner erred in holding that the repeated initiation of
communication from a client behind a firewall to a server on the other side
of the firewall may fairly be interpreted to equate to the maintenance of a
communications path between the two devices.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The following Findings of Fact (FF) are shown by a preponderance of
the evidence.
The Invention
1. Appellant invented a method of communicating with a device
coupled to one side of a firewall and network address translator (NAT)
(Specification 3:2-4).
2. Because a firewall rejects unsolicited communications from
devices outside the firewall, the method contemplates that the first device,
located behind the firewall, shall initiate communication with a node on the
other side of the firewall. Upon receipt of a response from the node, a
communications “path” through the firewall and NAT is created
(Specification 7:24 – 8:2).
3. The communications path through the firewall and NAT is
maintained by repeatedly sending keep-alive messages, such that the
network address translation information regarding the first device and the
representative independent claim. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 590, 18
USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991). See also 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013