Appeal 2007-0781
Application 10/003,150
A. ISSUE
The issue is whether Appellants have shown error in the rejection.
B. FINDINGS OF FACT
The record supports the following findings of fact (FF) by a
preponderance of the evidence.
1. The Examiner found that Garfinkle discloses the claimed subject
matter, as follows:
In regards to claim 1, Garfinkle discloses a method for
facilitating pay printing (abstract), the method comprising:
a network-based printing service retrieving a scaled-down
version of a full-sized document to be printed from at least one store
via a network (col 6, lines 1-25);
the printing service receiving print option selections (col 6,
lines 1-25); and
the printing service determining printing costs for printing the
full-sized document based upon attributes of the scaled-down version
(col 9, lines 53-65).
(Answer 3.)
2. Col. 6, ll. 1-25 of Garfinkle reads as follows:
In a most preferred embodiment, the photographer 8 accesses
HTML pages from a WWW browser using either the Secure
HyperText Transport Protocol (HTTPS) or HyperText Transport
Protocol (HTTP) to access a Netscape Enterprise Server running on an
Axil 320 Sparc acting as the image server. The Netscape server is
configured with an HTML forms interface which accepts the unique
access code and provides access to thumbnails (small replicas of the
full digital image) of the images in the roll in the form of an online
proof sheet. The interface B allows the photographer 8 to perform
specific tasks using the digital images, such as the ability to
electronically mail (email) an image to another party; download an
image to the photographer’s home computer 9f, see FIG. 9C; or order
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013