Appeal 2007-3540
Application 09/946,616
1 the user of the electronic auction web site because of the use of a credit card. We
2 find that Bogosian does anticipate this for the same reasons we stated for claim 1.
3 The Appellants have not sustained their burden of showing that the Examiner
4 erred in rejecting claims 11-13.
5 Claims 50-54
6 The Appellants argue claims 50-54 separately as a group. Accordingly, we
7 select claim 50 as representative of the group. Claim 50 is directed towards setting
8 up a payment account from which funds are automatically deducted.
9 The Examiner found that Bogosian cols. 5 & 13 anticipate claim 50 (Answer
10 6:Bottom ¶).
11 The Appellants repeat their contentions from claim 1 that Bogosian fails to
12 anticipate an automatic payment method; receiving an input from a user prior to
13 the conclusion of an electronic auction to execute an automatic payment method
14 after the conclusion of the electronic auction; or automatically deducting funds
15 from a payment account (Br. 21:Bottom three ¶’s – 22:Top two ¶’s). We find that
16 Bogosian does anticipate these for the same reasons we stated for claim 1.
17 The Appellants have not sustained their burden of showing that the Examiner
18 erred in rejecting claims 50-54.
19 Claim 57
20 The Appellants argue claim 57 separately. Claim 57 is directed towards
21 providing a buyer an option to enable an automatic payment service.
22 The Examiner found that Bogosian col. 5 anticipates claim 57 (Answer 7:Fifth
23 ¶).
16
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013