Appeal No. 2003-0428
Application 09/116,564
of obviousness without deference, and the Board’s underlying
factual determinations for substantial evidence. In re Huston,
308 F.3d 1267, 1276, 64 USPQ2d 1801, 1806 (Fed. Cir. 2002) citing
In re Gartside, 203 F.3d 1305, 1316, 53 USPQ2d 1769, 1776 (Fed.
Cir. 2000). “The Board’s findings must extend to all material
facts and must be documented on the record, lest the ‘haze of so-
called expertise’ acquire insulation from accountablitly.” Lee,
277 F.3d at 1345, 61 USPQ2d at 1435.
We agree with the Examiner that Mantha does not teach the
above limitations recited in Appellant’s claims. Mantha is
concerned with providing a user with a simple technique to take a
“snap shot” of a particular Web page that could be stored on the
client machine and then retrieved for subsequent viewing or use.
See Mantha, column 1, lines 55 through 58. Mantha teaches that
the preferred solution is to save a copy of the HTML base
document and each of its embedded objects on a client hard drive.
Hypertext references in the HTML base document that are
associated with the embedded objects are changed to point to the
hard drive. See Mantha, column 2, lines 12 through 17. In
response to a user’s request to save a copy of a Web page being
displayed, the following steps are performed. The base HTML
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007