Appeal No. 2007-0429
Application 09/848,430
pages, using a spreading activation technique (col. 2, ll. 3-8). The Examiner held
that the pages which form a website can accurately be characterized as a document
corpus containing an ordered plurality of documents because “[a]s is known in the
art, a website contains a home page, which frequently serves as a table of contents,
with links to various subsequent pages based upon content (See Microsoft
Computer Dictionary, Third Edition, page 506, definition of ‘website’, Exhibit B
attached).” (Answer 11.) Appellants disagree (Reply Br. 27). However, assuming
for the sake of argument that the Examiner is correct on this point, the rejection
nevertheless fails because, as pointed out by Appellants, Pirolli fails to disclose or
suggest using a single vector to represent a plurality of web pages (Br. 13). We
therefore agree with Appellants that even assuming it is proper to combine the
teachings of Call and Pirolli,
the most that can reasonably be asserted is that Call would provide to
Pirolli a preliminary conversion of data in the Web pages to be in
integer format. Each page, however, remains as an isolated entity, so
that the Web site (document corpus) remains as a collection of
documents represented in an integer format, to now be processed as
separate documents in accordance with the method described in Pirolli
that includes developing a matrix, similar to the conventional methods
disclosed by Appellants in their background discussion.
Id. We note that the Answer does not contain a response to this argument.
Because Appellants have persuaded us that Call and Pirolli considered in
combination fail to disclose or suggest using a listing of integers to represent plural
7 The title of the Reply Brief is “Appellants’ Response to Examiner’s
Answer.”
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013