Appeal No. 2006-1092
Application No. 08/948,530
16, the examiner's rejection essentially finds that Andrews discloses every
claimed feature except for (1) the database to be located in the Internet, (2) the
database located remote from the call centers, and (3) routing incoming calls to
the call centers [answer, page 5]. The examiner cites Becker as disclosing (1) an
SCP processor that stores information about the call centers, and (2) a CTI
processor for collecting data about the call center for routing incoming calls
[answer, pages 5 and 6]. The examiner finds that, in view of Becker, it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to
modify Andrews to locate the database in Andrews remote from the call centers
to share information among the call centers and enhance reliability [answer, page
6].
Appellant argues that Andrews does not teach any intelligent routing at the
Internet level because the routing server (48, 480) is at the customer premises
[brief, page 15]. Appellant further argues that Andrews does not teach or
suggest an initial call processing system in the Internet including an SCP
processor as claimed [brief, pages 16 and 17]. Appellant also argues that
Andrews' database is not connected to a routing server in the Internet and does
not store processed information about IPNT call centers as claimed. The
examiner responds that Andrews teaches (1) connecting database 54 to routing
server 48 in Fig. 2, and (2) connecting database 476 to routing server 480 in Fig.
10 that routes incoming calls to the call center via the Internet [answer, page 7].
11
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007