Appeal No. 2003-1094
Application No. 09/131,063
however, has not pointed out support in Hayashi for this
argument, and such support is not apparent.
We therefore conclude that the examiner has not carried the
burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the
inventions claimed in the appellants’ claims 1, 23, 35 and 38.
Accordingly we reverse the rejections of these claims and the
claims that depend therefrom.
Claim 48
In the rejection of claim 48 the examiner relies upon the
argument advanced with respect to the rejection of claim 1
(answer, page 15). As discussed above, this argument is not
persuasive. Moreover, the examiner has not provided evidence or
reasoning which shows that Hayashi would have fairly suggested,
to one of ordinary skill in the art, adding a comment to the data
structure in response to retrieval of a comment data tag embedded
in a hypertext document as required by claim 48.
We therefore reverse the rejection of claim 48.
DECISION
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1-5, 7-38, 46
and 48-50 over Hayashi is affirmed as to claim 46 and reversed as
to claims 1-5, 7-38 and 48-50. The rejection under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 of claim 6 over Hayashi in view of Nielsen is reversed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007