Appeal No. 2001-2051
Application 08/923,293
to do with entering a specified item as filter data for obtaining
recommendations of other goods and/or services from a previous
customer purchasing history database, as set forth in the claims
on appeal" (RBr2) and that there is no "user input" of a
specified item in Robinson (RBr2).
The examiner does not particularly point out what
description in Robinson is relied on as the customer commands.
The only thing we see that can possibly be the customer commands
are the ratings that the first user enters into the database at
step 60 (col. 6, lines 25-27 & 38-41), which ratings form the
basis for the recommendations. Payton also contains the same
teachings about the subscriber rating each of the items he or she
has previously requested (col. 5, lines 6-12), which ratings form
the basis for the recommendation. However, these ratings do not
satisfy the claim language of claims 1 and 7.
Claim 1 recites "specifying a particular good or service to
be used as filter data." While the ratings in Robinson and
Payton are used as filter data for a recommendation, the ratings
do not specify of a particular good or service to be used as
filter data for a recommendation. That is, the user does not
specify a particular good or service, such as specifying the book
Clear and Present Danger in appellant's example of Fig. 3D, which
is then used as filter data to get a recommendation. The user
gets a recommendation based on past ratings without specifying a
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007