Appeal 2007-1410
Application 09/811,038
(FF 9). However, Kalmanek does not teach that this assessment of adequate
bandwidth occurs in response to the validation of a reservation request.
Because Appellants have shown that the Examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of obviousness, we will not sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claims 8-23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
CONCLUSION OF LAW
We conclude that Appellants have shown the Examiner erred in
rejecting claims 8-23. On the record before us, claims 8-23 have not been
shown to be unpatentable.
DECISION
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 8-23 is reversed.
REVERSED
pgc
DILLON & YUDELL LLP
8911 NORTH CAPITAL OF TEXAS HWY
SUITE 2110
AUSTIN TX 78759
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: September 9, 2013