Appeal 2007-0039
Application 09/799,413
Rejection of claim 46
Appellant merely repeats the recited features of claim 46 and basically
relies on similar arguments made for the patentability of claim 14 (Br. 23).
As discussed above, Ferrel teaches that the end users may access the content
objects and edit the created stories that are stored on the host storage (FF 4-
7). Therefore, for the same reasons discussed supra, we find that Ferrel
suggests the subject matter of claim 46.
Rejection of claim 47
Appellant repeats the same arguments raised for the patentability of
claim 1 (Br. 23-25). As discussed above, Ferrel teaches a publishing system
that includes a storage means for storing a database and a software for
creating user interfaces enabling the user to access the database through the
worldwide web for creating stories using the components of a story from the
database (FF 3-7). Therefore, for the same reasons discussed supra, we find
the subject matter of claim 47 to be suggested by Ferrel.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Because Appellant has failed to point to any error in the Examiner’s
position, we sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1-47 over Ferrel.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1-47 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
13
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013