Ex Parte Gordon - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2005-2422                                                        
          Application No. 09/760,905                                                  

               Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it               
          reads as follows:                                                           
               1.    An ergonomics resource system comprising:                        
                    an interactive web-site including certain ergonomics              
               resources, said resources including at least one ergonomics            
               program that includes, in turn, at least one database;                 
                    a computer remote from said web-site;                             
                    access means for interactively connecting said web-               
               site and said remote computer; and,                                    
                    means to provide at least one report related to said              
               ergonomics resources.                                                  
               The reference relied on by the examiner is:                            
          Stern et al. (Stern)          6,592,223           Jul. 15, 2003             
                                             (filed Oct.  6, 2000)                    
               Claims 10, 11, 16, 17 and 20 stand rejected under the second           
          paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 for indefiniteness.                            
               Claims 1 through 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)            
          as being anticipated by Stern.                                              
               Claims 11 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as            
          being unpatentable over Stern.                                              
               Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the                 
          respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.                     



                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007