Ex Parte Kumhyr

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jan 31, 2005

09731628 (B.P.A.I. Jan. 31, 2005)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered
today was not written for publication and
is not binding precedent of the Board.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
_____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
_____________
Ex parte DAVID BRUCE KUMHYR
_____________
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
______________
ON BRIEF
_______________
Before HAIRSTON, FLEMING, and DIXON, Administrative Patent
Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1
through 36. After submission of the brief, the examiner objected
to claims 8 through 12, 20 through 24 and 32 through 36 as being
dependent upon rejected base claims, but found that they would be
allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
2
limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims
(answer, page 2). Accordingly, claims 1 through 7, 13 through 19
and 25 through 31 remain before us on appeal.
The disclosed invention relates to a method, system and
computer program product for controlling information gathered by
data collection agencies in an electronic transaction. A user
connects to a web site that controls the gathered information via
a web browser, and sends a persona facet (e.g., name, e-mail
address, payment method or other personal data) of user
selectable information that will be exposed during the electronic
transaction. If the web site recognizes the persona facet, the
user will receive information about the user that is stored in a
database at the web site. If the information is incorrect or
incomplete, the web site database can be updated with additional
information.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it
reads as follows:
1. A method for controlling information gathered by
data collection agencies in an electronic transaction
comprising the steps of:
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
3
selecting a persona facet by a user, wherein said
persona facet selected comprises a user selectable
information selected by the user to be exposed in said
electronic transaction;
connecting to a web site by a web browser;
sending said selected persona facet to said web
site by said web browser during said electronic
transaction;
receiving information about said user stored in a
database from said web site if said web site recognizes
said persona facet; and
updating said information about said user stored
in said database.
The reference relied on by the examiner is:
Koeppel et al. (Koeppel) 6,477,575 Nov. 05, 2002
(filed Sep. 12, 2000)
Claims 1 through 7, 13 through 19 and 25 through 31 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by
Koeppel.
Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) rejection of claims 1
through 7, 13 through 19 and 25 through 31.
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
4
Turning to the portions of Koeppel referenced by the
examiner, we find that Koeppel discloses a system and method
whereby the user/client, as opposed to the web site, captures and
stores all of the client’s web site activities in a client side
data store (column 11, line 21 through column 12, line 60). All
of the claims on appeal require the database at the web site to
store all user web site activities. Thus, the anticipation
rejection of claims 1 through 7, 13 through 19 and 25 through 31
is reversed because the user/client in Koeppel is incapable of
selecting a persona facet, sending the persona facet to a web
site during an electronic transaction, and receiving information
from a database at the web site if the web site recognizes the
persona facet.
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
5
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through 7,
13 through 19 and 25 through 31 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is
reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
MICHAEL R. FLEMING ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
JOSEPH L. DIXON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
KWH/vsh
Appeal No. 2004-1868
Application No. 09/731,628
6
KELLY K. KORDZIK
100 CONGRESS AVENUE
SUITE 800
AUSTIN, TX 78701