Appeal 2007-1867
Application 09/864,113
1 each contemporarily being a user of a common virtual shopping
2 resource, said shoppers being otherwise disassociated with each
3 other (see at least pages 1 - 8 and 11 -13); notifying a first
4 online shopper that at least one other concurrently online
5 shopper meets said search criteria; a associating said first online
6 shopper with said one or more concurrently online shoppers
7 meeting said criteria (see at least pages 1 - 2 and 7 - 9).
8 (Answer 7: Third full ¶.)
9 The Appellants contend that
10 the Examiner has erred in making these rejections in the
11 following ways:
12 (1) by improperly interpreting references for the basis of the
13 rejection leading to rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102(b) and
14 §103 which rely upon art that does not teach all of Appellants'
15 claimed elements, steps, and limitations;
16 (2) by basing rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and § 103 on
17 art which is not enabling to those ordinarily skilled in the art;
18 and
19 (3) by improperly combining references in the basis for a 35
20 U.S.C. § 102(b).
21 (Answer 4:Bottom of page.)
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013