Appeal 2007-1409
Application 09/823,626
notification of account changes. As discussed in our findings of facts
Gifford teaches determining whether a user has enabled a feature to receive
e-mail notification of non e-mail communications such as facsimiles, voice
mails etc. Thus, the notification enabled in Gifford is for all
communications received via a non-literal means, or for receipt of enriched
e-mail. Gifford does not teach describing an event and does not teach that
the non-literal communications represent an event that changes an
association between a customer and a particular agent. Similarly, we do not
find that Tabb’s teaching of generating hypertext linked reports suggests
enabling e-mail notification. Nor do we find that Woloshin’s teaching of
automatically receiving e-mail notification provides a teaching or suggestion
to enable or disable e-mail notification. Thus, we do not find that the
combination of Tabb, Woloshin, and Gifford teaches or suggests a feature of
enabling event description e-mail notification of an event that changes an
association between a customer and an agent if the event is detected and the
agent has enabled the e-mail notification, as claimed in independent claims
1, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26, and 32. Accordingly, we will reverse the Examiner’s
rejection of claims 1 through 28 and 30 through 33 under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a).
In rejecting claims 29 and 34 the Examiner further relied upon Perell.
The Examiner has not asserted, nor do we find, that Perell teaches or
suggests a feature of enabling e-mail notification of an event that changes an
association between a customer and an agent if the event is detected and the
agent has enabled the e-mail notification as claimed. Accordingly, we will
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013