Appeal No. 2004-1128
Application No. 10/099,121
points denoted by the keyword YESTERDAY, or an absolute time in
the past" (see column 31, lines 18-19).
Thus, Fehskens teaches that a time-stamp indicating a
creation time can be used to index a particular piece of
information stored in an archive, that a scope of interest time
may be used to request the piece of information from the archive,
and that a scope of interest time may be either an interval or a
particular instant. Fehskens suggests that a particular instant
can be represented either by an absolute time or by an interval
that begins and ends with the a relative term such as
"yesterday." In other words, Fehskens suggests that a relative
time-stamp representing an absolute time may be used to request
from an archive a document corresponding to the time-stamp.
Accordingly, we will sustain the rejection of claim 1 and the
claims grouped therewith, claims 3 through 8 and 10 through 15.
Claims 2 and 9 require a pointer to a previous version of
the electronic document when the previous version is
"substantially identical." The examiner adds Shnelvar and
Wlaschin to the base combination for the additional limitation.
Appellant provides no arguments regarding Shnelvar in the Brief.
In the Reply Brief (page 5) appellant states that "[t]he Examiner
acknowledges that Snelvar does not explicitly disclose
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007