Appeal 2007-2130
Application 10/141,222
§ 101. The major argued features of collection criteria, collection
instructions, usage information, update information etc., relate to mere
information elements per se and to no structural element for which any
change in methodology is actually recited. To be sure, the mere receipt and
providing features of representative independent claim 1 on appeal are not
characterized as being unique methodologies per se, but only the nature of
the information related to or the characterization of the information element
is argued to be operatively unique. These considerations are prompted by
the recent decision by our reviewing court in In re Comiskey, Slip Op. at 21
(Fed. Cir. Sep. 20, 2007).
We turn next to the rejection of claims 1 through 7, 9 through 15, 17
through 24, and 26 through 33 as being anticipated by Taghadoss. These
claims encompass each independent claim 1, 11, 20, 29, and 31, which have
corresponding limitations and are collectively argued. No arguments are
presented as to any dependent claims of any of these independent claims in
this rejection.
Because the Examiner has set forth a reasonable correlation of the
claimed features within the argued representative independent claim 1 on
appeal among all independent claims, and because the Examiner has directly
addressed each argument made by Appellant in the principal Brief on appeal
in the responsive arguments portion of the Answer, we are persuaded that
these claims are anticipated.
We make general reference to Taghadoss’s figure 1 through 4, 8, and
9. As a general matter, the reference is consistently addressing the updating
requirements of the Management Information Database (MIB) which is
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013