Appeal 2007-0954
Application 09/999,074
performs a task on an identity profile as claimed (Br. 8, 13-15). Appellants
argue that although Berg discloses workflows for automated computer-aided
design, the reference fails to suggest that Berg’s workflows may be used to
manage an identity profile (Br. 8).
Appellants further contend that Guheen customizes web interfaces
based on known qualities of web customers, but the reference is not directed
to user or group administration (Br. 9). Appellants argue that although
Guheen teaches that administrators or knowledge managers perform
administrative tasks as the Examiner indicates, Guheen does not teach or
suggest any software program or tool for performing such duties.
Appellants add that Guheen fails to disclose an identity profile or that
administrative tasks might be performed as part of managing an identity
profile (Br. 10; Reply Br. 3-4).
Appellants also argue that there is no motivation to combine Berg
with Guheen. According to Appellants, Guheen does not disclose any
technological means to perform user management, and Berg fails to disclose
any user management whatsoever (Br. 11-12).
The Examiner responds that Berg compiles a behavioral description of
a circuit design. According to the Examiner, an “identity profile” can be any
information associated with a particular circuit design; therefore, Berg’s
workflow is used to manage an identity profile as claimed (Answer 16).
commensurate limitations, namely performing a first workflow that performs
a first task (or operates) on an identity profile. In essence, Appellants have
not presented arguments for separate patentability for each respective
independent claim. See 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii). Accordingly, we select
claim 1 as representative of all independent claims.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013