Appeal No. 2003-0427
Application No. 09/808,950
functionality in the claims” as well as “the structural
limitations recited in the claims” because “eShop is implemented
through the World Wide Web, thereby incorporating World Wide Web
browsers and World Wide Web servers, including a cyber mall
server, various databases, and a cyber shop client (e.g., a
merchant terminal).” Thus, the 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) rejection of
claim 15 is sustained.
Turning lastly to appellants’ arguments (brief, pages 25 and
26) concerning dependent claims 16 through 20 and 22 through 26,
we agree with the examiner’s analysis (answer, pages 13 and 14)
that the system features and method steps of these claims are
either explicitly or inherently a part of the eShop system.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007