Appeal 2006-3144
Application 09/778,281
establishing at said scheduled time or during said scheduled time
range an authorized connection via the Internet between said server
computer and each of said invited users that choose to participate in said
gathering and,
responding to requests received from any given one of said invited
users during said online gathering by transmitting to said given user a
requested one of said customized Web pages.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show
unpatentability:
Tatham US 6,223,177 B1 Apr. 24, 2001
(filed Nov. 19, 1998)
Maurille US 6,484,196 B1 Nov. 19, 2002
(filed Mar. 20, 1998)
Sluiman US 6,590,589 B1 Jul. 8, 2003
(filed Nov. 29, 1999
Claims 1-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of
obviousness, the Examiner offers Tatham in view of Maurille with respect to
claims 1, 2, 6-10, and 12, and adds Sluiman to the basic combination with
respect to claims 3-5 and 11.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner,
reference is made to the Briefs and Answer for the respective details. Only
those arguments actually made by Appellants have been considered in this
decision. Arguments which Appellants could have made but chose not to
make in the Briefs have not been considered and are deemed waived [see 37
CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)].
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013