Appeal No. 2002-0068 Page 6
Application No. 09/102,038
information derived from an execution of an applet in a first HTML page to generate a
map relating a second HTML file with a command to show a second HTML page.
Having determined what subject matter is being claimed, the next inquiry is
whether the subject matter would have been obvious. "In rejecting claims under 35
U.S.C. Section 103, the examiner bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie
case of obviousness." In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956
(Fed. Cir. 1993) (citing In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1445, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1444
(Fed. Cir. 1992)). "'A prima facie case of obviousness is established when the
teachings from the prior art itself would . . . have suggested the claimed subject matter
to a person of ordinary skill in the art.'" In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781, 783, 26 USPQ2d 1529,
1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1051, 189 USPQ 143,
147 (CCPA 1976)).
Here, the listing of Oliver cited by the examiner "shows a simple HTML document
for embedding the Marquee applet." P. 566. The line of Holzner cited by the examiner
is used to "navigate [a] Web browser to [a Uniform Resource Locator ('URL')]." P. 362.
More specifically, it "uses the Applet class's getAppletContext() method to reach [a]
Web browser and the context's showDocument() method to open [a] new URL. . . ."
P. 362. The Figure of Peercy cited by the examiner "shows one possible structure of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007