Appeal No. 96-0712 Page 9
Application No. 08/015,756
Appellant argues that Herbst uses an electronic mail
system and requires a recipient to access a conventional fax
machine, not achieving the level of privacy and confidentiality
reached by the instant invention.
We find nothing in the instant claims which would preclude
the electronic mail system taught by Herbst nor do we find
anything explicit in the claims regarding any particular level
of privacy or confidentiality. Similarly, we find nothing in
the claims which would preclude the use of the special cover
sheet taught by Herbst and argued by appellant at page 6 of the
brief.
Appellant further argues that Herbst uses an “electronic
mail system rather than the claimed telephone system for the
actual transmission of the fax” [brief-top of page 6]. This
argument is not persuasive since the documents are transmitted,
in Herbst, over telephone lines, by using the electronic mail
system. Appellant’s argument would appear to indicate that
electronic mail systems and telephone systems are, somehow,
mutually exclusive, when, in fact, electronic mail systems rely
on telephone systems to transmit the mail over the telephone
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007