Appeal No. 2001-2260
Application 08/712,502
the user. Although Chinnock teaches that the host computer is
selected based on user supplied information, there is no
suggestion that this information includes location information of
the user. The user’s location is completely unrelated to the
type of information that the user is looking for on the network.
Therefore, the examiner’s finding that Chinnock teaches receiving
location identifying information is incorrect. Since this key
feature of each of the independent claims is not taught or
suggested by Chinnock or Weinberger, the examiner has failed to
establish a prima facie case of the obviousness of these claims.
Since independent claims 1, 25 and 45 are not rendered
obvious by the collective teachings of Chinnock and Weinberger,
and since the additional teachings of Abel do not overcome the
deficiencies discussed above, we also do not sustain the
examiner’s rejection of any of the dependent claims.
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007