Accordingto Petitioner, although Yamamoto “provideslittle detail about ... specific configuration of the IP server,” a personal of ordinary skill in the art (‘POSITA”) “would have realized, however, that the Internet was an unsecured public network,” and thus, “would have looked to Spacey to improve Yamamoto’s system by,e.g., implementing a firewall in front of the IP server.” Jd.
Petitioner contends that, as shownin its annotated Figure 1 of Yamamoto reproduced below, a system resulting from the proposed combination “would have included a firewall at a boundary between a private network of the IP server device and the Internet, as taught by Spacey.”
See generally Prelim. Resp. We have reviewed Petitioner’s arguments and evidence and determine Petitioner has made a sufficient showing that the combination of Yamamoto, Spacey, and Hazel teaches a “method of operating a server to managetransactions betweenfirst and second devices,”as recited in claim
Onthis record, Petitioner’s rationale that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have foundit obvious to combine the teachings of Yamamoto and Spacey,in further view of Hazelis sufficiently supported for purposes of this Decision.
In particular, in addition to the citations to Yamamoto, Spacey, Hazel, Orsic, and Stevens, Petitioner cites Chesley for its disclosures implementing ‘“‘a communication interface, processor, and memory in the gateway server.” Jd.