Appeal No. 2006-1287 Page 3
Application No. 10/047,116
Claims 1-3, 7, 11-13, 17, 19-21, and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as obvious over U.S. Patent No. ("6,535,909"), which incorporates by reference U.S.
Patent No. 5,944,791 ("Scherpbier"). Claims 4-6, 8-10, 14-16, 18, 22-24, and 26-28
stand rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Rust and U.S. Patent No. 6,546,405
("Gupta").
II. OPINION
"Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellants in toto, we
focus on the point of contention therebetween." Ex parte Muresan, No. 2004-1621,
2005 WL 951659, at *1 (Bd.Pat.App & Int. Feb 10, 2005). Although the examiner
admits, "Rust fails to explicitly state the subsequent user selecting a recorded but
previously unselected hyperlink as recited in the claims," (Examiner's Answer at 4), he
concludes "This is an obvious action for the user to take and is taught by any
browsing session." (Id. at 8.) In addition, the examiner alleges, "Obviousness is also
supported by the reference Scherpbier which is incorporated by reference into Rust
which discusses recording all of the hyperlinks, selected and unselected, within a
previously accessed website, transmitting them to a subsequent user, the co-pilot, and
allowing that co-pilot to select them as seen supra.” (Id.) The appellants argue that
"there is nothing in Rust to suggest that during a subsequent playback session, there
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007