Appeal 2007-0325
Application 09/780,248
1 • Whether claim 29 is properly rejected as obvious over Holden, and claims
2 30 and 32 as obvious over Holden and Alaia (Br. 12).
3
4 FACTS PERTINENT TO THE ISSUES
5 The following Findings of Fact (FF), supported by a preponderance of
6 substantial evidence, are pertinent to the above issues.
7 01. The Appellant admits that the phrase “which allows entering a user to
8 enter” is erroneous and that it will be corrected (Br. 6).
9 02. The Appellant admits that the use of the word “allowing” in claims
10 15-19 and 29 do not positively recite their object and that this is
11 intentional (Br. 6).
12 03. Thus, the use of the phrases beginning with “allowing” in claims 15-
13 19 and 29 present breadth, but not indefiniteness.
14 04. The Examiner contends that claim 15 and the claims that depend from
15 it contain a limitation in the alternative regarding the information that is
16 entered by a user, viz., “either one of a bid for said item, or an amount
17 that automatically wins the auction,” such that the claim claims entry of
18 either of the limitations (Answer 5, 15).
19 05. A series of claim limitations recited in the alternative is satisfied if
20 any one of the limitations is met. Therefore, the phrase “either one of a
21 bid for said item, or an amount that automatically wins the auction,” a
22 phrase recited in the alternative, is met if either of the limitations is met.
23 06. The Examiner further contends, and the Appellant agrees, that the
24 phrase “allowing displaying information which allows . . . a user to enter
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013