Appeal 2007-0926
Application 09/818,303
addressing the same field of endeavor, namely understanding queries to a
database in a user interface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have
looked to other solutions in this field when trying to improve the
interpretation of queries. We especially notice column 14 of Wang, in
which a user is asked to confirm the intent of his query when it is not fully
apprehended by the natural language interpreter. See FFs 5 to 7 above.
Thus we find that Wang supplies the teachings necessary to render the
claims cited under this rejection to be obvious.
In view of Wang teaching both the Internet use and a prompting of a
user for input to recast a query, we find that claims 3, 12, 30, and 39 are
rendered obvious by the teachings of Reimer and Wang.
Claims 26 and 53 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for being
obvious over Reimer in view of Menard. Menard is cited by the Examiner
(see Examiner’s Answer 15, bottom) for teaching the use of the preferences
of the user. We agree with this application of the art, and add that Menard
also teaches at the bottom of column 5, and the top of column 6, the
presentation of the keyword search file to the user for ascertaining if it needs
to be recast, and prompting for a customization of that file. We note that the
“ascertaining” need not be totally performed by the software, according to
the claims, but can involve the user. Thus we find that claims 26 and 53 are
also rendered obvious over the prior art, in this case Reimer and Menard.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013