Appeal No. 2003-0646
Application No. 09/250,154
Appellants argue that Appellants’ claims clearly recite that
the first control means is connected to the network access center
via the Internet and the second control means is connected to the
network access center via another network independent of the
Internet. Appellants argue that if the ISP 56 taught by Burns
includes all the functions of the first control means, second
control means and network access center as alleged by the
examiner, then the ISP 56 could not in any way correspond
directly to the specific features recited in the claims which
require that the first controlling means be separated from and
connected to the network access center via the Internet and a
second control means be separated and connected to the network
access center via the network independent of the Internet. See
page 7 of Appellants’ Brief.
In response, the Examiner argues that Burns teaches the
first control means shown as elements 70 and 74 in Figure 6 which
issues a data research request to network center shown as element
56 in Figure 6 connected to the Internet shown as 54 in Figure 6
in order to search and collect desired data designated in the
first search request from one of a plurality of web servers shown
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007