Appeal No. 2006-2418
Application No. 09/973,412
Turning to the prior art, Owensby inserts messages (e.g., advertisements) into a
wireless mobile communication based on the terminal's location [Owensby, col. 11, lines
20-25]. Although Owensby notes that the wireless mobile terminal could be a computer
and communicate wirelessly via the Internet [Owensby, col. 11, lines 56-65], the
reference does not indicate that the location-specific messages sent to such terminals
are IP addresses (i.e., links) that enable the user to selectively access the unique
location-specific content.
In addition, Heddaya does not remedy the deficiencies of Owensby noted above.
In Heddaya, an intermediate node intercepts service requests from a client node to a
primary server node. The intermediate node then instructs a selected secondary server
node to provide the service [Heddaya, abstract]. As a result, the client node is spoofed
into believing the response came from the primary server node [Heddaya, col. 11, lines
12-24]. Heddaya also discusses various other approaches in the background section
including mirroring servers and offloading servicing work to an intermediate node that
modifies a received document and sends the modified document to the client [Heddaya,
col. 2, lines 47-61; col. 3, lines 24-31].
Although Heddaya's service requests include access to information encoded in
hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) documents and document request messages are
sent in the form of URLs using the TCP/IP protocol [Heddaya, col. 6, lines 44-49], the
reference hardly teaches or suggests actually delivering identified URLs that correspond
to the location to a user's mobile terminal for selective access to the unique location-
specific content as claimed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007