Appeal No. 2005-2744
Application No. 09/849,979
Claims 61, 62, 72 and 73 depend upon claim 60 and 70 respectively.
Appellants have presented no arguments directed to these claims. Accordingly,
we sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 61, 62, 72 and 73 for the reasons
provided with respect to claims 60 and 70
Claim 64.
Claim 64 includes the limitations “debiting a payment account at a financial
institute associated with the requesting donor; wherein the payment account
associated with the requesting donor is debited at a time subsequent to an
activation of a hyper-link included in the transmitted electronic greeting card.
Claim 75 contains a similar limitation and as discussed supra we do not find that
Van Dusen teaches this limitation. We do not find that either Albrecht or Lenhart
teach or suggest that the donor’s account is debited subsequent to the recipient
activating a hyper-link associated with an electronic greeting card. Accordingly,
we will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claim 64.
Rejection of Claim 81 under 35 U.S.C. § 103
On page 28 of the brief, appellants assert that the rejection of claim 81 is
improper for the reasons discussed with respect to the other claims. On pages
29 and 30 of the reply brief, appellants state that the examiner’s position is not
understood. Appellants assert:
20
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007