Appeal No. 2006-1346 Παγε 3
Application No. 09/845,542
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. As a consequence
of our review, we make the determinations which follow.
The examiner has rejected the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Sherr in view of Official Notice. We have evaluated this rejection on
the basis of the following guidelines provided by our reviewing court: The examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of obviousness See In re
Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993), which is
established when the teachings of the prior art itself would appear to have suggested
the claimed subject matter to one of ordinary skill in the art See In re Bell, 991 F.2d 781,
783, 26 USPQ2d 1529, 1531 (Fed. Cir. 1993). This is not to say, however, that the
claimed invention must expressly be suggested in any one or all of the references,
rather, the test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of the references would
have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art See Cable Electric Products, Inc. v.
Genmark, Inc., 770 F.2d 1015, 1025, 226 USPQ 881, 886-87 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
The examiner finds that Sherr teaches the invention as claimed including
displaying an order page initiated by a right mouse click. The examiner concludes:
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention to include in Sherr, a shopping summary as
claimed in the instant invention, because this would permit buyers of the
system to use the right click option for any presentation of information that
was considered important enough to command the user of the right click
option.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007