Appeal No. 2005-0778
Application No. 09/867,587
With respect to independent claim 43, the examiner maintains that Hogan
teaches the claimed method by accessing the billing information via a URL on the World
Wide Web which is not via email. (Answer at page 10.) We agree with the examiner
that the log-on, transmission and presentation of a GUI to “Receive and Pay Bills” would
have been the notice, the subsequent selection of this choice by the user would have
been a request to receive billing information and the display of the billing information
would have been the transmission of at least a portion of the billing information in
response to the request by the user. (Hogan at column 6, lines 9-31.) Appellants
present discussions of various portions of Hogan and argue that Hogan does not teach
the claimed invention. (Brief at page 17-20.) Appellants conclude that Hogan teaches a
“pull” and a “push” embodiment. Appellants state that the pull embodiment is by a
protocol other than email. (Brief at pages 19-20.) This is the embodiment that the
examiner identifies in Figure 3 of Hogan, and we find that the user’s interaction with the
GUI teaches the claimed invention. Therefore, we find that Hogan teaches the
invention recited in independent claim 43, and we will sustain the rejection of
independent claim 43 and dependent claims 45 and 49 which appellants elected to
group therewith.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007