Appeal No. 2006-1346 Παγε 8
Application No. 09/845,542
[0066], or an order page [0071]. In our view, a person would have been motivated to
turn the display off after the display served its purpose, for example after obtaining
further information about the content. In addition, Sherr also discloses that a user can
build a list of orders which clearly suggests turning the order page on to build a
shopping summary and off to browse the content to further place items in the order.
In view of the foregoing, we will sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 15.
Claim 16 depends from claim 15 and further recites that the shopping summary
is included in a second web page. Appellants argue that Sherr does not disclose this
second web page. We will sustain the rejection as to this claim for the reasons stated
above in our discussion of claims 15 and 2.
Claim 17 depends from claim 15 and further recites that the shopping summary
is included in an overlay upon the electronic commerce web page. Appellants argue
that Sherr does not disclose this overlay.
We will sustain the rejection as it is directed to claim 17 for the reasons stated
above in our discussion of claims 15 and 3.
Appellants argue with respect to claims 18 to 21, which depend from claim 15,
that Sherr does not disclose the that the information displayed is a shopping cart, an
auction bid summary, a barter summary or a rental summary as recited in claims 18 to
21. We will sustain this rejection for the reasons stated above in our discussion of
claims 15 and claims 7 to 9.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007