Appeal No. 2001-1018
Application 09/211,688
allow customers scanned [sic, to scan] their purchases at the
checkout terminal under supervision of a store personnel in
order to promote the use of self-scanning shopping by training
new customers how to use the scanner correctly.” Like
appellants, we find no basis whatsoever in the applied
references, individually or collectively, for the examiner’s
conclusion of obviousness and concur with appellants that the
mere fact that one might have a general desire to promote the
use of self-scanning shopping would provide no apparent
motivation or suggestion to one of ordinary skill in the art
to modify the teachings of Van Solt, GB ‘575 or GB ‘395 so as
to arrive at appellants’ claimed subject matter set forth in
claims 1 through 4, 7 through 10, 13 through 15, 18 and 19 on
appeal. Finding that there exists no legally sufficient
teaching, suggestion or incentive to support the examiner’s
proposed modification of Van Solt, GB ‘575, or GB ‘395, we
will not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through
4, 7 through 10, 13 through 15, 18 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. §
103 as being unpatentable over Van Solt, GB ‘575, or GB ‘395.
14
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007