AT&T wins on indefiniteness, obviousness rejections

Ex parte DAVID G. RIVES


Thus, the Examiner has not satisfied the burden of providing evidence
that the prior art taught or suggested the step of “querying a network
database,” nor has the Examiner satisfied the burden of providing evidence
that the prior art necessarily inherently relied upon a database. See
MEHL/Biophile Int’l Corp. v. Milgraum, 192 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir.
1999) (“Inherency ... may not be established by probabilities or possibilities.
The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a given set of
circumstances is not sufficient.”)