Appeal No. 2005-1804 7
Application No. 08/882,197
that claim 3 only requires that the user rule page recite one of
a hardware profile, a software profile and a user profile
[answer, pages 9-15].
Appellants respond that there is no teaching or suggestion
in O’Toole of the automatic gathering of information from a
target computer, but instead, only a query session to determine
whether the user accepts an offer. Appellants also respond that
O’Toole does not teach or suggest the claimed second agent that
updates information in a user rule page and based on this updated
content, finds new content including a second advertisement that
is transmitted to the computer [reply brief].
We will sustain the examiner’s rejection of all the claims
on appeal for essentially the reasons argued by the examiner in
the answer. Regarding appellants’ argument that information is
not automatically obtained by a first agent in O’Toole, we do not
agree. O’Toole teaches that a user can control the release of
information by way of a security profile. Even though the user
may be queried to approve the transfer of information in some
instances, O’Toole also teaches that user information will be
automatically released to trusted servers [column 9, line 67 to
column 10, line 1]. Davis also teaches that it was well known to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007