Appeal No. 2004-1324
Application No. 09/495,116
Appellant argues that the Examiner provides no technical
principle for the proposed combination and for using any
encryption techniques in the method of Alles (reply brief, page
6). Appellant specifically relies on the way Alles is intended
to have the sponsor publicize its products and/or services and
argues that incorporating some type of encryption capability
would be contrary to the purpose of the reference (reply brief,
page 5). Appellant further asserts that Kupka, instead of
publicizing the advertisement material related to products and/or
services, limits the distribution or copying of information only
to the prepaid customers (id.).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner asserts
that Alles is indeed concerned with the security issues by
disclosing that a login process by the users is required (answer,
page 7). Furthermore, the Examiner concludes that the security
and encryption measures of Kupka coupled with the security
concerns of Alles are not contrary to the purpose of Alles with
regard to publicizing its products and/or services (id.).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In considering the question of the
obviousness of the claimed invention in view of the prior art
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007