Appeal 2007-1881
Application 10/092,259
Mitchelmore (paragraph [0085]) discloses that web management
subsystem 625 forms content requests and coordinates receipt of requested
content. Web management subsystem 625 may include a subscription
manager which allows users to keep track of current channel subscriptions
(paragraphs [0099]-[0100]). Details of software desired by the user are sent
to the subscription manager, and the subscription manager "may request
application files directly from the application developer's server"
(paragraphs [0179]-[0181]). Thus, Mitchelmore discloses communicating
with developers and arranging software downloads. Further, Mitchelmore
discloses (paragraph [0122]) that when a user wishes to install software on a
handheld device, the application is registered with an application manager.
Thus, Mitchelmore discloses coordinating software licensing. However, we
find nothing in the paragraphs cited by the Examiner or elsewhere in
Mitchelmore about a build-to-order configuration engine or about preventing
conflicts. Since Mitchelmore fails to disclose each and every limitation of
independent claim 1, we cannot sustain the anticipation rejection of claim 1
or its dependents, claims 2 through 18.
Regarding claim 19, Appellants contend (Br. 9-10) that Mitchelmore
fails to disclose querying how much memory is available in the handheld
device, querying whether the operating system can accommodate the
software, or reporting to the user that the additional memory is needed when
the device has insufficient memory. The Examiner cites paragraphs 5, 18,
19, 100, 178, and 181-183 as teaching the steps of claim 19. The second
issue, therefore, is whether Mitchelmore discloses querying how much
memory is available, querying whether the operating system can
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013