Appeal 2007-1289
Application 10/425,899
the proper combinability within 35 U.S.C. § 103 of the teachings and
suggestions of Sabet and Mooney.
As set forth in claim 21 on appeal, the claimed memory device is
stated to comprise a USB flash drive. By the use of the connective
“comprising” the memory device is capable of including more than the flash
drive. Even by cursory inspection of figure 1 of Sabet, the peripheral device
or portable device 15 in this reference is connected by USB connector to the
host computer 11 and the portable device 15 may be construed as the
claimed memory device to which it may be fairly said also comprises a flash
drive in the form of the SD memory card 13. Pages 1 through 3 of Sabet
clearly suggest if not explicitly teach to the artisan, particularly in
conjunction with the closing remarks at page 11 of this patent, the use of a
USB flash drive as a form of flash memory. Sabet’s teachings are solely
based upon the use of a flash memory 13. This specific teaching value
disclosed is in the form of a SD memory card as shown in figure 1 but the
narrative teachings are much more expansive. In any event, the particular
form in which the memory 13 is shown in Sabet has not been contested by
Appellant’s arguments in the Brief and Reply Brief.
The nature of the teachings in Sabet make it clear that the
compression and expansion as well as the encryption and decryption
functions occur in the portable device 15 which is inclusive of the manner in
which the broadly recited “memory device” of representative claim 21
defines it as well. Once the memory stick 13 is inserted in the portable
device 15 it is fair to characterize in the art the portable device 15 as a
memory device which in turn has operating software therein to perform the
functions of compressing and encrypting information, the converse functions
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013