Appeal No. 2004-1201
Application No. 09/051,118
claim 57 and adds Krasle as to claim 73.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the examiner,
reference is made to the brief and reply brief for the appellants’ positions,
and to the answer for the examiner’s positions.
OPINION
For the reasons set forth in the principal brief on appeal, we reverse
the nine separately stated rejections of all claims on appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 103. The top of page 8 of the principal brief on appeal initially
states the following:
The combination fails to teach or suggest retrieving and
searching a file for links and then assigning a respective
different identifier to each of a plurality of links located from
the search of the file for presentation to a user, and a
command-based interface for use by the user to input an
assigned identifier.
From our study of the principal brief on appeal, the same nutshell-type
remarks are presented at the middle of page 12 and at the bottom of page
13 for each respective independent claim 25, 36, 75, 84, 86 and 90 on
appeal.
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007