Appeal No. 2003-2053
Application 08/646,500
electronic conferencing applications 102 be independent of the
Larson’s teleconferencing software. The term “accessory” only
requires that the Larson Electronic Conferencing Applications 102
be a subordinate or supplemental item to the Larson’s
teleconferencing application. As shown above, Larson does teach
that the Electronic Conferencing Applications 102 are accessories
in that they are supplemental items in which the software package
can choose to use. Therefore, we find that the Examiner has
shown that Larson teaches all the claimed elements recited in
Appellant’s claim 11.
For independent claim 16, Appellant argues that Larson does
not teach “automatically accessorizing all automatic accessories
each automatic accessory having a capability” as required by
Appellant’s independent claim 16. Appellant argues that Larson
fails to teach “accessories” for the same reasons as argued for
independent claim 1. Appellant further argues that Larson fails
to teach “automatic accessories.” See page 25 of the brief.
As shown above, we have found that Larson does teach
accessories. Furthermore, we find that Larson does teach
automatic accessories. The Examiner has pointed out that Larson
teaches automatic accessories in column 13, lines 23 through 29
and that the Persistent Conference Manager 108 provides all the
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007