Ex Parte Jakobsson - Page 16

            Appeal 2007-1751                                                                                 
            Application 09/769,511                                                                           

        1   further disclose that in addition to time related billing rates, the service provider            
        2   (called party) may have numbers which enable a single item charge. The Examiner                  
        3   concluded that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify the                 
        4   system of Greene with the teachings of Haralambopoulos in order to store the                     
        5   caller-specified costs and rules in a database associated with the user terminal to              
        6   provide the user the convenience to modify or change charges and rules (Answer 7:                
        7   ¶ referring to claim 13 and 14).                                                                 
        8       The Appellant contends that Haralambopoulos describes a system which                         
        9   depends on an action by the called party. Claim 13, on the other hand, describes a               
       10   system in which any access costs incurred by the caller are dependent on one or                  
       11   more specified conditions associated with an incoming call. The Appellant                        
       12   contends that these conditions are intrinsic to the incoming call and no actions by              
       13   the caller during a conversation are required to establish a billing rate. (Br. 10:Last          
       14   full ¶ - 10:Top of page).                                                                        
       15       Thus, the issue under contention is whether claim 13 requires that no action by              
       16   the caller is required to establish a billing rate.  Claim 13 contains the transition            
       17   phrase “comprises,” which is open ended in that additional elements might be                     
       18   included within an embodiment and still be within the scope of the claim.  Thus, so              
       19   long as the applied art shows one or more access rules specified by the user and                 
       20   indicating a particular access cost for an incoming call under one or more specified             
       21   conditions, as Greene does (FF 08-10), then there is no requirement that no action               
       22   by the caller is required to establish a billing rate.  Thus, we find the Appellant’s            
       23   arguments unpersuasive.                                                                          
       24       As to the Appellant’s argument that the combination would change the                         
       25   principle of operation (Br. 11, First full ¶), citing In re Ratti, 270 F.2d 810, 123             

                                                     16                                                      


Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013