Appeal 2007-2167
Application 09/991,752
10. As depicted in Figure 11 of Gupta ‘258, a user 558 queries a
dynamic agent 560, which accesses information from the information
sources and stores or caches the resulting data in a relational database 562.
The relational database may also contain other relational data in conjunction
with the relational data from the information sources. (col. 8, l. 25 through
col. 9, l. 4).
11. Gupta ‘258 discloses that when the dynamic agent receives a
query from a user, the agent determines whether there is sufficient data
already in the relational database to satisfy the query (col. 9, ll. 5-7). If
additional data or information is needed, the agent issues a query to the
mapper, which in turn issues queries to the appropriate information sources
through the wrappers (col. 9, ll. 9-12).
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
To reach a conclusion of obviousness under § 103, the Examiner bears
the burden of producing factual basis supported by teaching in a prior art
reference or shown to be common knowledge of unquestionable
demonstration. Our reviewing court requires this evidence in order to
establish a prima facie case. In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1471-72, 223
USPQ 785, 787-88 (Fed. Cir. 1984).
Furthermore, the test for obviousness is what the combined teachings
of the references would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art.
See In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987-88, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir.
2006), In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013