Appeal No. 2003-1031 Page 12
Application No. 09/050,841
vendor's equipment. To the contrary, the reference's invention operates "across distinct
domains of the World Wide Web." P. 4, l. 27. "The World Wide Web . . . is a large
collection of computers," p. 1, l. 2, not all of which use the same vendor's equipment.
Because Rosenberg's method operates across domains/servers that use equipment
from different vendor's, we find that its domains do not all share a proprietary protocol.
Therefore, we affirm the rejection of claims 51 and 52.
B. CLAIMS 10-17, 30-37, AND 47-49
Admitting that "Rosenberg fails to disclose using an intermediary application to
provide said state information to at least one of said client application and said server
application," (Examiner's Answer at 11), the examiner asserts, "Davis discloses in col 4,
lines 37-40 and lines 55-58, Fig 5, intermediary application, client, receives request
from server A and transmits information to server B." (Supp. Examiner's Answer at 3.)
The appellants argue, "the tracking program of Davis et al. is not disposed to receive
transmissions exchanged between the client and the server, but instead simply
monitors the user's interaction (e.g., keyboard presses, mouse clicks) with the
client. . . ." (Supp. Appeal Br. at 15.)
1. Claim Construction
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007