Appeal No. 2007-0220
Application No. 09/982,640
This appeal involves claims 1 through 42 and 44, which constitute all
the claims pending in this application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b) and § 134(a). An oral hearing regarding this appeal was conducted on
May 23, 2007.
As best representative of the broadest disclosed and claimed
invention, independent claim 1 is reproduced below:
1. A method of supplying advertisement information to a user
searching for said information within a data network, comprising the steps
of: receiving from the user, a series of search rules comprising facts about an
advertisement; accessing a database comprising details of a plurality of
advertisements; using a search engine to apply said search rules to said
database; and reporting, to the user, results comprising a subset of the
contents of said database.
The following references are relied on by the Examiner:
Loeb US 6,421,652 B2 Jul. 16, 2002
(filed Jul. 27, 1999)
Skillen US 6,098,065 Aug. 1, 2000
In a first stated rejection, the Examiner has rejected all claims on
appeal, claims 1 through 42 and 44 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being
anticipated by Skillen. Secondly, claims 1 through 10, 39 through 42, and
44 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Loeb.
Lastly, claims 11 through 38 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness, the Examiner relies upon Loeb alone.
Rather than repeat the positions of the Appellant and the Examiner,
reference is made to the Brief and Reply Brief for Appellant’s positions, and
to the Answer for the Examiner’s positions.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013