Appeal 2007-2241
Application 09/768,990
1 Alberts differs from the claimed method in that the triggering
2 information the claimed method uses comes from information provided in a
3 subscriber profile rather than, as with Alberts, statistics taken from the
4 behavior of users accessing websites.
5 Tso discloses sending information over a network to a user depending
6 on information contained in a user profile.
7 What information is sent to the user is dependent on various factors,
8 including: the location of the user; the time of day; and the
9 information contained in a user profile.
10 Col. 1, ll. 48-52. Tso uses a system which comprises a server (called an
11 “InfoCast” server) connected to a network that contains a “subscriber
12 database at the user’s home” (col. 4, ll. 38-41; referred later in Tso as
13 “subscriber database 53”) and an “InfoBite” database (element “50,” col. 4,
14 l. 44; “InfoBite” is information sent in lieu of the full item, see col. 7, ll. 30-
15 40), and a schedule/resource controller (element “61”).
16 Schedule/resource controller 61 is responsible for filtering the
17 InfoBites that are sent to a user based upon the user’s profile as
18 contained in the user’s record and subscriber database 53 - i.e., a
19 subscriber profile filter, the user’s current location - i.e., a locational
20 filter, and the time of day - i.e., a temporal filter.
21 Col. 10, ll. 41-46. This passage appears to teach the delivery of content
22 filtered on the basis of information, such as the time of day, contained in a
23 subscriber profile.
24 Given the teachings of Alberts and Tso, we ask the Examiner to
25 consider whether it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
26 art to deliver time-significant advertising content to a subscriber over a
27 network triggered by information contained in a subscriber’s profile. While
28 neither Alberts and Tso explicitly show comparing the current time with the
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013