Appeal No. 2006-1764
Application No. 10/177,965
for providing at least one web-based page….’” is without merit because the examiner
relied on Cogger for such teachings.
The obviousness rejection of claim 12 is sustained because appellant has not
presented any patentability arguments for this claim apart from those presented for claim
11.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1, 5 through 11, 13 through 16 and
18 through 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is affirmed, and the decision of the examiner
rejecting claims 2 through 4, 12 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007