Appeal No. 2005-0509 Page 3
Application No. 09/449,237
processing the request at the online site to determine whether the portal
was sponsored and whether the request was received from an authorized user;
and
responding to the request based in part on whether the portal was
sponsored and whether the user is authorized.
References
The references relied on by the Examiner are as follows:
Baker et al. (Baker) 5,678,041 Oct. 14, 1997
Roth 5,890,997 Apr. 6, 1999
Szabo 5,954,640 Sep. 21, 1999
Rejections At Issue
Claims 81 and 93 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being obvious
over the combination of Baker.
Claims 82-87, 90, and 95-97 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being obvious over the combination of Baker and Szabo.
Claims 88-89 and 91-92 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
obvious over the combination of Baker and Szabo and Roth.
Throughout our opinion, we make references to the Appellant’s briefs, and
to the Examiner’s Answer for the respective details thereof.1
OPINION
1 Appellant filed an appeal brief on October 8, 2003. Appellant filed a reply brief
on June 4, 2004. The Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer on April 2, 2004.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007