Appeal No. 2004-0354
Application No. 09/240,118
based application system that incorporates the displaying of the
performance data prior to selection of the reference, and
concludes that it would have been obvious to combine Luzzi with
Barrick so as “to enable the user a more informed decision with
regards to the accessing of a hyperlink” (answer-page 4).
Appellants contend that the examiner’s rejection is
deficient in several aspects. First, say appellants, Barrick
does not teach to integrate the performance data into a graphical
display of references/documents “prior to selection of one of
said references” because Barrick teaches that there must be a
selection of a hyperlink in the web page before the browser agent
can begin to measure a download interval (column 7, lines 46-48)
(principal brief-page 5). Appellants contend that only in
certain embodiments of Barrick are hyperlinks to test pages even
displayed, and these embodiments all require that the user select
a hyperlink prior to performance data being measured.
Appellants disagree with the examiner’s assertion that
Barrick teaches integration of performance data into a graphical
display of a reference because the display frame 480, relied on
by the examiner for this teaching, does not display performance
data at all. In fact, argue appellants, display 480 of Barrick
is only used to display the actual test page that is downloaded.
-5–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007