Appeal 2007-0896
Application 09/731,019
1 displayed review associated with a product/service helpful in determining
2 whether or not to purchase or use the product/service; received at the
3 database an indication that the user has clicked the interactive element, and
4 incrementing a count of a stored number of indications for the review in
5 response to the indication; and displayed the count of the stored number of
6 indications for the review on the client display together with the review.
7 05. However, NowThis is silent as to whether the count was incremented if
8 the stored number of indications did not exceed one indication for the
9 review from the user.
10 06. The Examiner has taken official notice of the notoriety of one vote per
11 person (Answer 3-7).
12 07. It is clear that any count of the number of positive and negative reviews
13 would be meaningless were a single voter able to cast multiple votes.
14 08. Thus, the nature of the subject matter being voted on in NowThis suggests
15 that the count was incremented if the stored number of indications did not
16 exceed one indication for the review from the user.
17 09. Epinions presents a user interface similar to that discussed regarding
18 Amazon.com in FF02& 03 at the bottom of the page marked 10.
19 10. Epinions is explicitly a review of reviews (Epinions, p. 8, “Who needs
20 another buying guide… to rate the opinions …”)
21 11. Salas explicitly limits votes to one per voter (Salas, col. 16, ll. 51-54).
22 12. Salas’s votes apply to questions posed by a discussion group related to
23 products and services.
24 13. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have consulted both
25 Epionions and Salas in the design of a user interface for reviews related to
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013