Appeal 2007-0264
Application 09/986,248
The Examiner rejects claims 1 through 21 as follows:
A. Claims 1 through 3, 13 through 15, 25 and 26 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102 (e) as being anticipated by Halpern.
B. Claims 4, 5, 16 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Halpern.
C. Claims 6 through 10, 18 through 23, 27 through 29, 31 and 32 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the
combination of Halpern and Feinman.
The Examiner relies on the following references:
Feinman 6,075,943 Jun. 13, 2000
Halpern 6,282,711 Aug. 28, 2001
Independent claim 1 is illustrative and representative of the
Appellants’ invention. It reads as follows:
1. A method of requesting and processing a plurality of objects from
a server, comprising:
requesting a plurality of objects from the server;
receiving a response message from the server, the response message
containing the plurality of objects packed into the response message; and
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013