Appeal 2007-0990
Application 09/871,920
Regarding claims 29 and 47, we find Appellants’ arguments
persuasive (Br. 16-17). Again, we note the Examiner has provided only a
general citation in support of the rejection of numerous dependent claims,
including claims 29 and 47 (Answer 5, 12). The Examiner has not provided
any specific citation directed to whether the content item is a “parent content
item” or “automatically initiating a review of a child content item linked to
the parent content item” (claim 29; see also equivalent language of claim 47)
Upon review of the general citations of the Examiner, and the entirety of
both references, we find nothing in Ivanov or Kilbaner that fairly teaches or
reasonably suggests that “the content item is a parent content item” or
“automatically initiating a review of a child content item linked to the parent
content item in response to a modification of the parent content item,” as
required by the language of claim 29 and the equivalent language of claim
47.
We note that claims 30, 31, 48, and 49 depend from claims 29 and 47,
respectively. Because we have reversed the Examiner’s rejections of claims
29 and 47, we will also reverse the Examiner’s rejections of claims 30, 31,
48, and 49 as being unpatentable over Ivanov in view of Kilbaner.
DECISION
We sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-19, 23, 24, 26, 27,
32-40, 43, 45, 50, and 59, but we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims
20-22, 25, 28-31, 41, 42, 44, and 46-49. Therefore, the decision of the
Examiner rejecting claims 1-50 and 59 is affirmed-in-part.
15
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013