Appeal No. 2004-0992
Application No. 09/560,458
Representative independent claim 15 is reproduced as
follows:
15. A method comprising:
determining whether a client is configured to automatically
display adverting material in association with other content; and
providing through a server access to the other content.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Hidary et al. (Hidary) 5,774,664 Jun. 30, 1998
Claims 2-7 and 9-26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as
unpatentable over Hidary.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that contrary to appellant’s
indication, there is no issue before us involving a rejection
under 35 U.S.C. 102. The sole issue before us on appeal is the
obviousness of the claimed subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 103.
It is the examiner’s position, with regard to claims 2-4, 6,
7 and 9-14, that Hidary discloses detecting an event comprising
comparing the time of day, which reads on the current time, to
the time that advertising is to be distributed (column 3, lines
47-49); viewing an advertisement distributed over a TV
-2–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007