Appeal No. 2003-0293
Application No. 09/472,197 Page 13
deficiency of Scroggie, the examiner (id.) turns to Jermyn for a
teaching of “customizing purchase incentives for selected
consumer households based on the detailed purchasing history and
the consumer profile or classification also based on the
purchasing history.” The examiner argues (id.) to the effect
that it would have been obvious to provide the database of
Scroggie with a consumer classification, as taught by Jermyn so
that consumers could be targeted with specific incentives based
upon their associated category, so that consumers would be
presented with incentives they would most likely be interested
in.
Appellants assert (brief, page 6) that “[t]here is simply no
motivation in the cited references or in the body of knowledge
generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to use
the observed offline purchase history of the consumer (said
purchase history including information of a purchase of the
consumer collected at a point of sale when the purchase
transpired) in combination with the other claimed limitations to
provide the desired result of the present invention, which is to
automatically deliver targeted advertisements to consumers on the
basis of their observed offline purchase histories.” Appellants
argue (reply brief, page 5) that Scroggie alone provides the
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007