Appeal 2007-0325
Application 09/780,248
1 • Whether claim 28 is properly rejected as anticipated by Holden.
2 o Whether the art applied shows treating a bid received within a
3 predetermined period of time before an end time of an auction less
4 favorably than bids received prior to said predetermined period (Br. 7-
5 8).
6 • Whether claims 5-7 are properly rejected as obvious over Shoham and eBay
7 Help.
8 o Whether the art applied teaches or suggests defining rules for actions
9 in an auction, said rules including at least a time when the action will
10 take place, and an actual action that will take place at the defined
11 time; and keeping the rules secret until the defined time (Br. 85).
12 • Whether claims 9-11 are properly rejected as obvious over Shoham and
13 Harrington.
14 o Whether the applied art teaches or suggests making a decision at the
15 local computer to accept or reject a new bid from a user at the local
16 computer; and only if the new bid is accepted at said local computer,
17 sending information about the new bid to the server computer,
18 wherein said accepting a bid comprises comparing a local bid to said
19 highest bid information, and sending said information to said server
20 computer only when said local bid is higher than said highest bid
21 information (Br. 9-10).
5 The Appellant includes claim 8 in their contentions regarding this issue, but claim
8 is cancelled.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013