Appeal No. 2004-1959
Application No. 09/465,465
wherein the variable data customer document includes
selected information for consideration by the customer based on
the mined and determined customer preferences originating from
the customer information, and
wherein the statement including the variable data
customer document is adapted to be electronically presentable to
the customer.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Gerace 5,848,396 Dec. 08, 1998
Schutzer 6,292,789 Sep. 18, 2001
(filed Aug. 21, 1998)
Claims 1-4, 7-13, and 15-17 stand finally rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Gerace. Claims 5, 6,
and 14 stand finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Gerace in view of Schutzer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs1 and Answer for the
respective details.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal,
the rejections advanced by the Examiner and the evidence of
anticipation and obviousness relied upon by the Examiner as
1 The Appeal Brief was filed November 17, 2003 (Paper No. 19). In
response to the Examiner’s Answer mailed December 17, 2003 (Paper No. 20), a
Reply Brief was filed February 9, 2004 (Paper No. 21), which was acknowledged
and entered by the Examiner as indicated in the communication dated February
27, 2004 (Paper No. 22).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007