Appeal 2007-1127
Application 09/800,112
protocol suite.” It is well known in the networking art that the
protocol field identifies “which protocol gave the data for IP to
send”. (TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1 - The Protocols, W.
Richard Stevens, 1994, pages. 34-37, figure 3.1 ).
Appellants further contend that the Examiner’s contention, “does not
equate with identifying whether a message is IP or non-IP” and “[t]he
Examiner has apparently failed to give due consideration to the plain words
of the claim” (Reply Br. 3).
We affirm.
ISSUE(S)
Have Appellants shown that the Examiner has failed to establish one
skilled in the art would have incorporated Thornton’s IP message
encapsulating into Matsumoto’s IP network in such a manner as to obtain a
“Protocol Type for denoting whether the message is an IP message or an
encapsulated non-IP message” as required by claim 22?
FINDINGS OF FACT
Appellants invented a method of controlling Internet Protocol (IP)
telephones within a local area network (LAN) implemented or Ethernet PBX
(private branch exchange). (Specification 1:6-8). Specifically, the method
uses a general message template consisting of a Protocol Header and an IP
Message body where the Protocol Header includes an indication of the
Protocol Type, Device Number, and Message Type. (Specification 1:28-30).
The Protocol Type denotes whether the message is an IP message
(e.g. Mitel proprietary Minet IP message) or an encapsulated non-IP
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013