Appeal No. 2006-1342
Application No. 09/488,471
disclosure requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112. Ex parte Holt, 19 USPQ2d 1211(Bd Pat App &
Inter, 1991).
The claimed “businesses that are selected from an unrestricted pool of merchants” is said
by appellant to be supported by the disclosure of a business rating system described in connection
with the WWW (p. 6, ln.7-8; p. 9, ln. 16-17), so that “absent a clear indication to the contrary, it
should be quite clear to person of ordinary skills in the art that the businesses on the Internet are
part of an unrestricted pool of merchants” (principal brief-page 9). The examiner counters that
even if WWW constitutes an unrestricted pool of merchants, there is still no description of
“businesses that are selected” from an unrestricted pool of merchants as claimed.
We agree with appellant. The specification (p.9, ln. 16-17), as originally filed, discloses
that the business rating system is described in connection with the WWW. Thus, it is evident
and would have been to artisans at the time of the instant invention, the WWW constitutes an
“unrestricted pool of merchants,” and that certain of these businesses would be “selected” for
ranking based on a user’s query over the WWW. It is thus clear to us that appellant had
possession of the ranking of businesses that are selected from an unrestricted pool of merchants,
as now claimed, at the time of filing the instant application.
Turning to the claimed feature of “updated cumulative business satisfaction ratings from
the users’ on-line surveys or feedback automatically cause the on-line ranking system to re-index
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007