Appeal No. 2007-0384
Application No. 09/681,784
ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to incorporate an online
auction format in Saba’s software to allow users to buy learning solutions,
such as textbooks for self-study, by an online auction.
Appellant argues that the Examiner has not provided a prima facie
case that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
combine Saba’s software with CollegeBytes.com (Br. 6). We are not
persuaded by this argument.
Reference A, among others, teaches that Saba’s software allows users
to buy learning solutions, although it does not explicitly state how these
learning solutions are bought and sold. As evidenced by CommonPlaces,
online auctions were known in the art at the time the present application was
filed. CommonPlaces also indicates that online auctions were used to buy
and sell textbooks, among other things. Based on these teachings, we agree
that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine
Saba’s software with the online auction capabilities of CollegeBytes.com in
order to buy and sell learning solutions (e.g., books) through an online
auction for the known advantages of online auctions.
We conclude that the Examiner has set forth a prima facie case that
claim 10 would have been obvious over Saba’s software in view of
CollegeBytes.com, as disclosed in CommonPlaces, which Appellant has not
rebutted. We therefore affirm the rejection of claim 10 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103. Claims 17 and 19 fall with claim 10.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013