Ex Parte ROFF - Page 5




              Appeal No. 2001-1517                                                                                        
              Application No. 09/132,285                                                                                  


                     From our review of the limited discussion in Kavanagh regarding the use of                           
              rewards to improve patient appointment compliance, we find no teaching, suggestion or                       
              convincing line of reasoning why it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in                     
              the art to look to the teachings of Bank Ad for a suggestion to use life insurance as a                     
              reward for patients to improve medical appointment attendance.                                              
                     Additionally, from our review of the teachings of Bank Ad, we find that Bank Ad                      
              merely teaches the use of a free year of homeowner’s insurance for a one time                               
              refinancing of a home loan.  While the examiner maintains that Bank Ad teaches the                          
              use of free insurance as an incentive to induce customers to use a bank’s services at                       
              the time of the invention, we find that Bank Ad generally teaches the use of free                           
              mortgage insurance and mentions one use of free life insurance from credit unions for                       
              its members.  We are unsure whether if the examiner references the free mortgage                            
              insurance from Zions Bancorp, which we find is not insurance on an individual’s life, but                   
              on the home to protect the bank’s interest in the home, or the life insurance from the                      
              credit union and mistakenly refers to the credit union as a bank.  (See final rejection at                  
              pages 4-5.) Either way, we do not find that the examiner has provided a convincing line                     
              of reasoning for providing an extended payment for life insurance as an inducement for                      
              patients to attend their scheduled appointments for chiropractic care.  Appellant argues                    
              that the teaching of payment of a first year of mortgage insurance as taught by Bank Ad                     
              is not a motivation or suggestion to provide life insurance as an inducement to attend                      

                                                            5                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007