Appeal No. 1999-1852
Application No. 08/701,242
be any further identification of documents linked to the set of original relevant documents.
Accordingly, we do not find that Kupiec anticipates the instant claimed invention.
Sotomayor is employed by the examiner only for its references to the Internet and
does not provide for the deficiencies of Kupiec, as noted supra. Accordingly, we will not
sustain the rejection of claims 3-5 and 19-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combination
of Kupiec and Sotomayor.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1, 2, 6-18 and 22-30 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(a) and claims 3-5 and 19-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH L. DIXON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
eak/vsh
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007