Appeal 2007-0471
Application 10/423,307
1 change the way an item is accessed. Further, Clifton-Bligh teaches counting
2 the number of click (links) required to reach a file (web page).
3 With respect to why it would have been obvious to combine the
4 references to generate different paths based on the number of interfaces
5 used, the articulated reasoning of the Examiner (Answer 7) points to a
6 motivation to combine at Paragraph 0022 of Clifton-Bligh. However, the
7 cited motivation relates to “displaying” rather that the claimed “generating”
8 and the Examiner fails to articulate why Paragraph 0022 would lead one to
9 modify the “generating” of Gifford based on the number of interfaces used
10 to access an item (i.e., how difficult it is to access an item). At most we
11 have before us a conclusory statement using Paragraph 0022 and rejections
12 on obviousness grounds cannot be sustained by mere conclusory statements.
13 KSR Int’l. v. Teleflex Inc., No. 04-1350, 2007 WL 1237837 at 13, 82
14 U.S.P.Q.2d 1385, 1396 (Apr. 30, 2007) (citing In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977,
15 988, 78 USPQ2d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2006)).
16 Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection under 35
17 U.S.C. § 103 for the same reasons as set forth above.
18 OTHER ISSUES
19 The Board brings to Appellant’s and the Examiner’s attention the
20 following prior art reference:
21 Hochmuth US 6,377,286 B1 Apr. 23, 2002
22 We leave it to the Examiner to determine if Hochmuth and similar prior art
23 describes the limitations recited in claims 8, 9, 18, 19, 28, and 29.
24 CONCLUSION
25 In view of the foregoing discussion, we have sustained the rejection
26 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 1-6, 11-16, and 21-26, we have sustained
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013