Appeal 2007-1775
Application 09/749,106
a programming provider system connected to the signal
processing units and configured to:
transmit fee-based programming events to the signal
processing units; and
determine prices of programming event purchased by the
plurality of subscribers, wherein a price for each programming
event is determined according to a number of purchase orders
for the same programming event received from subscribers
belonging to a same subscriber group, wherein the price
decreases in proportion to increasing orders from different
subscribers belonging to the same subscriber group, wherein
each subscriber belonging to the subscriber group maintains an
independent account with the programming provider whereby
the subscriber pays the programming provider in order to
receive paid for programming, and wherein each subscriber
may elect to purchase or not purchase each programming event.
THE REFERENCES
Pallakoff US 6,269,343 B1 July 31, 2001
Bonomi US 6,769,127 B1 July 27, 2004
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 1-4 and 6-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over the teachings of Bonomi in view of Pallakoff.
Rather than repeat the arguments of Appellants or the Examiner, we
make reference to the Briefs and the Answer for the respective details
thereof.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013