Ex parte LAWTON et al. - Page 4




               Appeal No. 95-3031                                                                                                      
               Application 08/057,206                                                                                                  


               user profile.  Anticipation is established only when a single prior art reference discloses, expressly                  
               or under principles of inherency, each and every element of a claimed invention.  RCA Corp. v.                          
               Applied Digital Data Sys., Inc., 730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert.                         
               dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984).                                                                                        
                                        The Rejection of Claims 1-4, 6, 9, 10, 12 and 14-20                                            
                                                       under 35 U.S.C.  103                                                           
                       Claims 1-4 and 14-20, rejected over Ojha and Nakano, and claims 6, 9, 10 and 12,                                
               rejected over Ojha and Pasetes, each require a user profile (independent claims 1 and 15) or a                          
               database having a plurality of user identity and transaction data information (independent claim                        
               14).  None of the above art discloses either of the aforementioned claim requirements and the                           
               examiner has given no reason why this gap between the prior art and appellants’ system is simply                        
               so small as to render the system obvious at the time the invention was made to one reasonably                           
               skilled in the art.  Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C.                    
               103.                                                                                                                    
                       We will not sustain the rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C.  103 over Rosenbaum in                           
               view of Nakano.  At page 4 of his answer, the examiner states that Rosenbaum teaches that a text                        
               is validated by use of a knowledge base or profile (column 4, lines 20-46).  Although this is true,                     
               neither reference discloses a database having a plurality of user identity and transaction data                         




                                                                  4                                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007