Appeal No. 2001-0615
Application No. 08/741,459
party and that none of the applied art teaches or suggests selectively connecting a local
workstation to a plurality of entities selectively by the first party. Specifically, appellants
state that Blumer may indicate many authors may be online on many servers but that
Blumer doesn’t suggest a first user selectively connecting to a plurality of servers; that
Davidson teaches a first party, the loan applicant, transferring personal information from
a PC to a bank server and that while the server may be connected to a computer
network having a plurality of computers 26, the first user does not selectively connect
his PC with the plurality of computers 26 because the loan institution itself chooses if,
and which, of the plurality of computers 26 are used. With regard to Bly, appellants
argue that this reference is silent as to a first user selectively connecting a workstation
to a plurality of remote entities because while Bly teaches a multi-user collaborative
system in which multiple users are connected to a single server, Bly fails to suggest a
single user connecting to a plurality of remote entities, or servers.
For the limitation of a “plurality of remote entities selectively connectable by said
first party,” the examiner relies on Davidson. Since Davidson discloses a first party
sending a document to a remote entity for further development and/or approval of that
document, receiving that document back from the remote entity, and then sending the
document to another remote entity for further development and/or approval, the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007