Appeal 2007-1762
Application 10/218,245
said user entering a new e-mail address while a confirm
status of said e-mail address is change pending; and
displaying a message to said user that said new e-mail
address is to be sent to said partner site but not to said
authentication proxy.
THE REFERENCES
Togawa US 2002/0004821 A1 Jan. 10, 2002
(filed Mar. 28, 2001)
Bilbrey US 2002/0103932 A1 Aug. 1, 2002
(filed Aug. 3, 2001)
THE REJECTIONS
1. Claims 2, 20-23, 29-33, 36-38, and 41-43 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
2. Claims 2, 8, 19, 21, 22, 35, 37, 38, 40, 42, and 43 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Togawa.2
2 We note that claim 21 (rejected under § 102 as being anticipated by
Togawa) depends upon claim 20 (rejected under §103 as being obvious over
Togawa). It is improper to apply a § 102 rejection (i.e., anticipated by
Togawa) to a claim that depends upon another claim rejected under §103 as
being obvious over Togawa. Because claim 22 depends upon claim 21, and
claim 23 depends upon claim 22, we find at the outset that dependent claims
21-23 have been improperly rejected by the Examiner. Likewise, claim 37
(rejected under §102 as being anticipated by Togawa) depends upon claim
36 (rejected under §103 as being obvious over Togawa). Because claim 38
depends upon claim 37, we also find that dependent claims 37 and 38 have
been improperly rejected by the Examiner. Similarly, claim 42 (rejected
under §102 as being anticipated by Togawa) depends upon claim 41
(rejected under §103 as being obvious over Togawa). Because claim 43
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013