Appeal No. 2006-1346 Παγε 5
Application No. 09/845,542
and effect relationship between the detection step and the showing step (see reply brief
at page 11). However, in our view, there is no relationship between the content of what
is displayed and the display itself. As such, the contents of the display alone will not
render the claim patentable.
In any case, Sherr discloses that upon the detection of a right click, an order
page is displayed [0071]. The order page is depicted in Fig. 10 clearly displays that the
Jerry Maguire movie is being ordered. This order page, in our view, is a shopping
summary as broadly claimed. We further note that Sherr discloses that a user may
build a list of orders prior to checkout which would have suggested to a person or
ordinary skill in the art that the order page may include a summary of a plurality of items
being purchased.
In view of the foregoing, we will sustain this rejection as it is directed to claim 1.
We will also sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 4 because the appellants
have made similar arguments in regard to the patentability of claim 4 as the arguments
to claim 1.
In regard to claim 2, the appellants argue that the cited prior art does not disclose
or suggest that the act of showing a shopping summary comprises accessing a second
web page.
We do not agree because the order page depicted in Figure 10 is another web
page. Therefore, we will sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 2. We will also
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007