Ex Parte Baskey et al - Page 7

                Appeal 2007-1238                                                                             
                Application 10/037,595                                                                       
                communication protocol software module to temporarily store a received a                     
                data frame.  (Paragraph [0025].)                                                             
                7.   Nair teaches that a buffer manager allocates a memory buffer space to                   
                a protocol software module to store a received data frame.  The buffer                       
                manager subsequently passes a pointer to all the protocol software modules                   
                that desire to access the received data frame in the shared buffer space                     
                without having to copy said data frame from one buffer space to another.                     
                (Paragraph [0020] and [0021].)                                                               

                                          PRINCIPLES OF LAW                                                  
                                   1.     OBVIOUSNESS (Prima Facie)                                          
                      The Supreme Court in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18,                      
                148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966), stated that three factual inquiries underpin any                   
                determination of obviousness:                                                                
                      Under § 103, [1] the scope and content of the prior art are to be                      
                      determined; [2] differences between the prior art and the claims                       
                      at issue are to be ascertained; and [3] the level of ordinary skill                    
                      in the pertinent art resolved.  Against this background, the                           
                      obviousness or nonobviousness of the subject matter is                                 
                      determined.  Such secondary considerations as commercial                               
                      success, long felt but unsolved needs, failure of others, etc.,                        
                      might be utilized to give light to the circumstances surrounding                       
                      the origin of the subject matter sought to be patented.  As                            
                      indicia of obviousness or nonobviousness, these inquiries may                          
                      have relevancy.                                                                        
                Where the claimed subject matter involves more than the simple substitution                  
                of one known element for another or the mere application of a known                          
                technique to a piece of prior art ready for the improvement, a holding of                    
                obviousness must be based on “an apparent reason to combine the known                        


                                                     7                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013