Appeal No. 2005-0074
Application No. 09/739,080
software” to communicate and receive data remotely (OrdaCard,
second full paragraph). OrdaCard also discloses “remote live
enrollment” for customers with “secured transfer of data” (first
full paragraph). Accordingly, giving the broadest reasonable
interpretation to the claimed term “web client” consistent with
the specification, we determine that OrdaCard describes a “web
client” that communicates data objects over a network, and views
and accesses data from the server. Therefore we affirm the
examiner’s rejection of claim 33 under section 102(b) over
OrdaCard.
With regard to the rejection of claim 34, we note that the
examiner has asserted that “remote internet access” requires a
web browser (Answer, page 8; see the “remote live enrollment” and
“Internet connection” disclosed by OrdaCard). Appellants have
not contested the examiner’s assertion.
With regard to the rejection of claim 39, appellants argue
that the “data subscription services” required by claim 39 is not
the same as the “enrollment” taught by OrdaCard (Brief, page 11).
However, we agree with the examiner that the broadest reasonable
interpretation of “data subscription services” would include
“remote live enrollment” of a customer to accomplish transfer of
data to produce ID cards. See In re Graves, supra. We note that
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007