Appeal No. 2006-1092
Application No. 08/948,530
Internet browser program [Ginsberg, col. 3, lines 10-21]. Control and signaling
module 275 obtains call center status information from call center 250, which can
be an Internet-based switch [Ginsberg, col. 4, lines 2-6]. If an agent is currently
available, the control and signaling module enables the switching element 250 to
establish a communications link from the customer's telephone 150 to the agent.
Notably, the communications link may be Internet-based packet communication
[Ginsberg, col. 4, lines 20-37]. In our view, such an Internet-based call routing
system fully reads on "an initial call-processing system in the Internet receiving
IPNT calls from customers in the Internet" as claimed.
Although appellant argues that Ginsberg's routing system is at the
customer premises and serves only that customer and thus does not require
central computerized routing intelligence including SCP processors, we note that
appellant's arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claim
language. In short, Ginsberg's Internet-based call routing is "in the Internet"
given the limitation its broadest reasonable interpretation. Moreover, we agree
with the examiner that Ginsberg's control and signaling module 275 reads on the
claimed SCP processor given the term its broadest reasonable interpretation.
Although the examiner indicates that Ginsberg differs from claim 6 in
calling for an SCP processor that receives agent information from a plurality of
call centers and storing such information in a database to route incoming calls to
the call center [answer, pages 3 and 4], we find no such limitations in claims 6-8.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007