Appeal No. 2002-2174
Application No. 09/263,166 Page 13
Appellants additionally refer to their arguments with respect to
independent claim 55 that contains a similar limitation, arguing
that:
there is no step taught of the consumer computer (e.g.,
the interface unit) accessing the location and the
resulting step that a set of one or more parameters is
displayed when the consumer computer accesses one of
the locations on the network where the selection
mechanism is published.
We note at the outset that appellants do not dispute the
examiner's finding that the interface unit of Johnson is a user
computer, but rather argue that there is no step taught of the
interface unit accessing the location (where the incentive
existence message is published), and the resulting step that one
or more parameters is displayed when the consumer computer
(interface) accesses one of the locations where the selection
mechanism is published.
From our review of Johnson, we find that the interface unit
can be a stand-alone piece of equipment (col. 9, lines 7 and 8)
that processes the data sent by the Moderator, which processes
and sorts the data to determine which bids apply to which end
users (col. 8, lines 53-55). We further find that the
information received from the Moderator may be displayed for
evaluation by the end user, or processed within the interface
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007