Appeal No. 2002-1865
Application 09/452,678
upon determining that said set of items purchased
satisfies said purchase requirement, providing to said customer a
benefit associated with said combination purchase requirement;
and
debiting said first sponsor of a first amount and
debiting said second sponsor of a second amount in response to a
redemption of said benefit.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Schultz et al. (Schultz) 5,056,019 Oct. 8, 1991
Baker, III 5,864,822 Jan. 26, 1999
(filing date June 25, 1996)
Claims 1-54 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As
evidence of obviousness, the examiner relies upon Schultz and
Baker.
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the
examiner, reference is made to the brief and reply brief as well
as the answer.
OPINION
In sustaining the rejection of the claims on appeal under
35 U.S.C. § 103, we do so for the reasons set forth by the
examiner in the answer, as embellished upon here.
At the outset, it appears that appellants have argued all
claims on appeal in the principal brief. As noted by the
examiner at the bottom of page 2 of the answer, method and system
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007