Ex Parte Grebus et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Aug 9, 2012

11013197 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 9, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte GARY L. GREBUS, DAN C. VUONG, and PAUL MOORE
____________________

Appeal 2010-0043461
Application 11/013,197
Technology Center 2400
____________________

Before JEAN R. HOMERE, CAROLYN D. THOMAS, and ANDREW J.
DILLON, Administrative Patent Judges.

HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

1 The real party in interest is Hewlett Packard Development Corp. (App.
Br. 1.)

Appeal 2010-004346
Application 11/013,197

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1-3, 5-23, 25-35, 38-43, and 49-65.2 Claims 4, 24, 36,
37, 44-48 have been canceled. (App. Br. 2.) We have jurisdiction under 35
U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
Appellants’ Invention
Appellants invented a method and system for providing secured
communication (12) between a remote node (13) and member nodes (101-
103) of an aliased cluster (11) that provides an illusion that the nodes therein
share a same network address. (Fig. 1, Spec. 4, ¶ [0019].) In particular, a
first group of the aliased cluster member nodes are assigned to process
secure incoming communication received from the non-member node,
whereas a different group of member nodes are assigned to process outgoing
communication to the non-member node. (Spec. 8, ¶ [0030].)
Illustrative Claim
Independent claim 1 further illustrates the invention as follows:

1. A method comprising:

implementing cluster aliasing for a cluster of a plurality
of computer-based members; and

2 Claims 27-31 and 49-57 have been indicated as containing allowable
subject matter. (Ans. 39.)
Appeal 2010-004346
Application 11/013,197

3
supporting, by the aliased cluster, secured
communication with a non-member node, wherein the cluster
aliasing provides an appearance to said non-member node of a
common network address for the plurality of members, and
wherein said supporting the secured communication comprises:

assigning a first of the plurality of members to
process secure inbound data directed to the common
network address from the non-member node; and

assigning a second, different of the plurality of
members to send secure outbound data from the common
network address to the non-member node.

Prior Art Relied Upon
The Examiner relies on the following prior art as evidence of
unpatentability:
Godwin US 2002/0095603 Al Jul. 18, 2002
Beck US 6,549,538 B1 Apr. 15, 2003

Rejection on Appeal
The Examiner rejects claims 1-3, 5-23, 25, 26, 32-35, 38-43, and 58-
65 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination of
Godwin and Beck.
ANALYSIS
We consider Appellants’ arguments seriatim as they are presented in
the principal Brief, pages 6-16.
Representative Claim 1
Dispositive Issue: Have Appellants shown that the Examiner erred in
finding that the combination of Godwin and Beck teaches or suggests a first
Appeal 2010-004346
Application 11/013,197

4
plurality of aliased cluster nodes are assigned to process secure inbound
communications received from a non-member node, whereas a different
plurality of cluster nodes are assigned to process outbound communications
to the non-member node, as recited claim 1?
Appellants argue that the Examiner erred in finding that the proposed
combination of references teaches or suggests the disputed limitations
emphasized above. In particular, Appellants argue that Godwin discloses a
single distributing processor for performing all secure network
communications functions, whereas the claim requires different groups of
cluster nodes perform different network communications functions. (App.
Br. 7-8.)
In response, the Examiner finds that Godwin’s disclosure of servers
and a distributing computer that evaluate communications between them to
determine the authenticity of a communication source teaches the disputed
limitations. (Ans. 31-32.)
On the record before us, we do not agree with the Examiner’s findings
and ultimate conclusion of obviousness. In particular, Godwin discloses a
distributing processor (50) that provides a common network address for
allowing a client computer (10) to securely communicate with a cluster of
servers (52, 54, 56). (Abstr., ¶¶ [0068, 0071-0073], Fig. 4.) The distributing
processor also includes IP filters for controlling all inbound and outbound
communications to and from the cluster. (¶ [0075].) Godwin further
discloses that the distributing processor may work with the servers to
determine the authenticity of a source. (¶¶ [0087-88].) We find that, while
Appeal 2010-004346
Application 11/013,197

5
Godwin’s clustered servers may assist the distributing computer in
evaluating network traffic to help provide a secure network communications,
different groups of the servers are not assigned to handle inbound and
outbound traffic. Rather, as argued by Appellants, the distributing processor
is assigned to perform all such functions, and not the clustered servers. We
also note that, while the Examiner has cited to various paragraphs in Godwin
for the disputed limitations, the Examiner has not provided any cogent or
reasonable explanation, nor have we been able to discern how the cited
portions of Godwin teach or suggest those limitations. Additionally, we
agree with Appellants that Beck’s disclosure fails to cure the noted
deficiencies of Godwin. (App. Br. 8.)
Because Appellants have shown at least one error in the Examiner’s
rejection of claim 1, we need not address Appellants’ other arguments. It
follows that Appellants have shown error in the Examiner’s rejection of
claim 1.
Because claims 2-3, 5-23, 25, 26, 32-35, 38-43, and 58-65 also recite
the disputed limitations of claim 1 above, Appellants have similarly shown
error in the Examiner’s rejection of those claims for the same reasons set
forth above.

DECISION
We reverse the Examiner’s rejections of claims 1-3, 5-23, 25, 26, 32-
35, 38-43, and 58-65, as set forth above.
REVERSED
Appeal 2010-004346
Application 11/013,197

6

peb