Appeal 2006-2157
Application 09/752,204
1 This appeal arises from the Examiner’s Final Rejection, mailed January 11,
2 2005. The Appellants filed an Appeal Brief in support of the appeal on July 6,
3 2005, and the Examiner mailed an Examiner’s Answer to the Appeal Brief on
4 December 12, 2005.
5 PRIOR ART
6 The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the
7 appealed claims are:
8 Barnes US 5,970,475 Oct. 19, 19998
9 Meltzer US 6,125,391 Sep. 26, 20009
10 Fox US 6,560,581 B1 May 6, 2003
11 (Jun. 8, 1998)
12 Johnson US 6,598,029 B1 Jul. 22, 2003
13 (Apr. 4, 2000)
14 Haddad US 2003/0208433 A1 Nov. 6, 2003
15 (Dec. 12, 2000)
16 We also make the following art of record16
17 Conklin US 6,141,653 Oct. 31, 200017
18
19 REJECTION
20 Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-34, 36-38, 40-43, 45-69, 71-73, 75-78, and 80-101
21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over Barnes, Meltzer, Fox, and
22 either of Haddad or Johnson.
23 The Examiner applies Barnes for its description of trading system
24 implementation details and of the use of trusted electronic data interchange (EDI)
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013