Appeal No. 2002-0574
Application No. 09/144,949
information whether the item is a random weight item, and if the
item is a random weight item, sending a message to the electronic
price label.”
O’Connor recognizes (Figure 1; column 1, lines 28 through
60) that some items may be sold via a normal unit price (e.g., as
in Sundelin), that some items may be sold via a random weight
(e.g., as disclosed by appellants), and that some items may be
sold via a per piece price.
Based upon the teachings of Sundelin and O’Connor, the
examiner states (answer, page 5) that “it would have been obvious
to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention
to integrate, with the system and method as taught by Sundelin,
determining from the identification information whether the item
is a random weight item, and if the item is a random weight item,
sending a message to the electronic price label, in order to
display the correct price for a random weight item, thereby
increasing the versatility of the system since the system can be
used with random weight items as well as regular items.” The
examiner acknowledges (answer, page 5) that “Sundelin as modified
by O’Connor fails to teach displaying only unit price
information, and to clear a total price portion of the display,”
but concludes (answer, pages 5 and 6), “[h]owever, at the time of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007