Appeal No. 2000-0264
Application No. 08/752,624 Page 9
However, we are persuaded, for the reasons which follow, by
appellant's assertion (brief, page 7) that the prior art does not
disclose or suggest the step of an originating user designating
one of a plurality of countries during an E-mail to a first of
two servers. Claim 1 requires the step of e-mailing a paging
signal to a first server or web site in a first country, the
paging signal including, inter alia, a pager I.D., and the step
of designating a second country from a plurality of potential
countries in which the receiving user is to be paged. The
examiner's position (answer, page 6) is that "[i]nclusion of a
country code in the number to specify the country, region or
nation where the message is to be transmitted is discussed in
col. 8, line 56 - col. 9, line 5." However, the portion of
Gaskill relied upon by the examiner relates to the instruction
associated with key 7, and is used by the receiving user, not the
sending user, as required by claim 1. In any event, if we
considered the telephone number of a receiving user in a foreign
country to be the pager I.D. number inputted by the sending user,
as advanced by the examiner, claim 1 would not be met because
the pager I.D. number, including the country code, would have
already been entered by the originating user, and the additional
claimed step of designating a second country code would not be
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007