Appeal No. 2002-0119
Application No. 09/015,713
anchor tags, teaches an alternative arrangement that avoids
hyperlinked anchor tags and uses a structured document that
contains no links within the document (brief, page 8).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner asserts
that using well known short names, such as abbreviated versions
of names of Hamilton in combination with the product description
of Schumacher would have been motivated by Schumacher’s disclosed
“headings that provide overview information” (answer, page 5).
Furthermore, the Examiner refers to the SGML index fields of
Schumacher for generating documents with anchors pointing to
product descriptions, related items and aliases and acknowledges
the absence of a teaching that these aliases are well known short
names (answer, page 6). However, the Examiner characterizes the
abbreviated versions of names in Hamilton as the claimed short
names based on Schumacher’s teachings related to headings that
provide overview information (id.).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). To reach a conclusion of
obviousness under § 103, the examiner must produce a factual
basis supported by teaching in a prior art reference or shown to
be common knowledge of unquestionable demonstration. Such
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007