Appeal No. 2001-0954
Application No. 08/977,193
Claims 1, 7 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Austin.
Claims 2 through 6, 8 through 12, 14, 15, 18 and 19 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Austin in view of Yoshiura.
Claim 16 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Austin in view of Baehr.
Claim 13 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Austin in view of Yoshiura and Imai.
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 11 and 13)
and the answer (paper number 12) for the respective positions of
the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will sustain the obviousness rejection of claims 1 through
12, 14, 15 and 17 through 19. The obviousness rejection of
claims 13 and 16 is reversed.
We agree with the appellant’s finding (brief, pages 7 and 8)
that Austin discloses the “use of a ‘user profile’ to direct
distribution of a single document to multiple services such as
printers and facsimile machines located within a network . . . ”
and “to enable the job [to] be processed in a manner likely to be
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007