Appeal 2007-1241
Application 09/794,486
Appellant additionally argues that “Serbinis does not teach
establishing an account [to pay for storage and access fees], or for charging a
financial account for data access and storage” and that “Serbinis merely
discloses keeping a table of information regarding pricing and billing
information” (Br. 24-25). The Examiner points to column 6, lines 47-53 of
Serbinis for teaching creating a financial account from which funds are
withdrawn corresponding to a data storage fee (Answer 19). At column 6,
lines 47-53, Serbinis teaches creating an account for storing information
including billing information, “such as the user’s credit card number”, in a
database located at a document management services provider. We note that
this language indicates that a credit card number is merely exemplary of the
types of financial accounts that would have been usable by Serbinis. One of
ordinary skill in the art would have been aware of many alternative types of
accounts for billing a user. Serbinis additionally teaches charging the
account for data storage fees (col. 13, ll. 30-50). Therefore, we disagree
with Appellant, and find that Serbinis does teach establishing a financial
account for the purpose of charging a user for data storage.
Appellant’s Reply Brief presents substantially identical arguments to
those presented in the Appeal Brief. Appellant again argues that “the
encryption/decryption takes place at the document originator’s vault
environment and not at the server.” (Reply Br. 6). As discussed supra with
respect to independent claims 1, 10, 16 and 21, the document originator’s
vault is located at the server, as shown in Figures 1 and 2 and their
accompanying discussion (col.3, ll. 55-67; col. 5, ll. 33-63). This
relationship is clearly shown in Figure 2, which depicts the document
16
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013