Appeal No. 2004-1128
Application No. 10/099,121
electronic document should include a time-stamp indicating a
creation time of a corresponding version." Further, appellant
argues (Brief, pages 4-5) that Kahle fails to teach a "relative
time-stamp indicating a time offset from a predefined time."
As explained supra, Archive97 not only includes URLs with
time-stamps indicating a creation time of a webpage, but also
includes requests for websites wherein the requests include the
time-stamps. Accordingly, Kahle is merely cumulative regarding a
time-stamp indicating a creation time of a webpage and a request
for the webpage including the time-stamp. Regarding relative
time-stamps, the examiner applied Fehskens, not Kahle.
Appellant argues (Brief, page 5) that "the requests in
Fehskens are not for electronic documents having multiple
versions, where each of the versions have a 'time-stamp
indicating a creation time of said corresponding version.'"
Appellant continues, "Fehskens interprets a request for
information 'at or before' a given time, as a 'request for any
information with a time stamp at or before the given time,'"
rather than just the one version that corresponds to a relative
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007