Appeal No. 2006-1492
Application No. 09/884,489
With regard to the rejection of claims 16, 17, 22, 39, 40,
and 45, appellants make the same argument about the combination
of HistoryKill and Janis not teaching the identified session is
identified based on the selected user identification (principal
brief-page 16). For the reasons supra, we disagree and we will
also sustain the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-5, 8-10, 16-20,
22-28, 31-33, 39-43, 45, and 46 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007