Ex Parte Boesjes

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 31, 2004

09123778 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 31, 2004)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not
written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 25
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte EIMAR M. BOESJES
______________
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before THOMAS, HAIRSTON, and KRASS, Administrative Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This appeal involves claims 55 through 78.
The disclosed invention relates to a central storage area
for digitally transferable goods from multiple providers, and to
the download of purchased digital goods from the central storage
area to a shopper.
Claim 55 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it
reads as follows:
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
2
55. A method of conducting a commercial transaction
that includes a transfer of digitally transferable
goods from a provider to a shopper through a globally
accessible computer network, comprising:
providing in the globally accessible computer network a
storage and distribution region for storage of an
inventory of digitally transferable goods, the
storage and distribution region including multiple
provider areas assigned to corresponding multiple
remotely located providers for storage of
digitally transferable goods uploaded by the
multiple remotely located providers;
establishing common administrative control of uploading
of digitally transferable goods from any of the
multiple remotely located providers to the
corresponding assigned provider area;
establishing in response to a request by any of the
multiple remotely located providers and in
operative association with the common
administrative control a digitally transferable
goods transfer communication link within the
globally accessible computer network, the goods
transfer communication link providing a pathway by
which the remotely located provider can upload a
set of digitally transferable goods to and store
the set of digitally transferable goods in the
corresponding assigned provider area of the
storage and distribution region;
establishing within the globally accessible computer
network a network connection to the storage and
distribution system in response to a request by a
shopper for product information about a member
item of the set of digitally transferable goods
uploaded by one or more of the multiple remotely
located providers;
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
3
causing in response to a purchase order made by the
shopper a transfer of an ordered member item of
the set of digitally transferable goods by
downloading to the shopper the ordered member item
by way of the globally accessible computer network
from the storage and distribution region; and
providing for the remotely located provider whose
member item was ordered and transferred an
accounting record of the transfer of the ordered
member item.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Sirbu et al. (Sirbu) 5,809,144 Sep. 15, 1998
(filed Aug. 24, 1995)
Chen 5,978,775 Nov. 2, 1999
(effective filing date Dec. 8, 1993)
Claims 55 through 78 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Sirbu.
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 19 and 21)
and the answer (paper number 20) for the respective positions of
the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
For all of the reasons expressed by the appellant in the
briefs, and for the additional reasons set forth infra, the
obviousness rejection of claims 55 through 78 is reversed.
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
1 We note in passing that the admitted prior art in Chen
(column 1, lines 32 through 55) discloses a computerized bulletin
board system (BBS) that includes a listing of information as well
4
The examiner contends (answer, page 8) that the entries in
the configuration file in Chen (column 13, lines 39 through 42)
“are analogous to the ‘inventory of digitally transferable
goods’” in the claimed storage and distribution region.
Chen clearly explains (column 3, lines 39 through 44) that
the configuration files 250 and 350 are for “storing
specifications on accessing the information that is available
through the information distribution system from the plurality of
information suppliers 10, 20, 30.” Chen further explains (column
10, lines 17 through 23) that “[r]egardless of whether the
configuration files 250, 350 reside locally in the memory of
customer terminal 50, or are stored centrally in a central
catalog system 60, any further processing requires interaction
between the customer terminal 50 and the supplier terminal 15,
25, 35 of the information supplier 10, 20, 30 that provides the
selected information item.” In other words, “the supplier
terminal 15 will transmit the selected information item to
customer terminal 50” (column 12, lines 2 through 4). Thus, the
referenced portion of Chen1 is directed to the cataloging of
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
as the information per se. Chen does not disclose that the BBS
has an inventory of information items from a plurality of
providers.
5
descriptions of information items in the configuration file, and
not to information items per se. Any items described in Chen’s
configuration file must be purchased directly from suppliers 10,
20 and 30, and not from the configuration file.
In summary, the obviousness rejection of claims 55 through
78 is reversed because “neither reference discloses or suggests
upload of digital goods from multiple providers . . . and storage
of those goods in a centrally administered storage and
distribution region of a global computer network, or download of
purchased digital goods of multiple providers from the centrally
administered storage and distribution region” (reply brief, page
5).
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
6
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 55 through
78 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
REVERSED
JAMES D. THOMAS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
)
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
KWH/hh
Appeal No. 2003-0108
Application No. 09/123,778
7
DAVID S. ALAVI
3762 WEST 11TH AVE.
#408
EUGENE, OR 97402