Appeal No. 2003-1051
Application No. 09/247,134
“because by creating a template, selected information can be
extracted in order to identify specific information as taught by
Lech thus minimizing the need of manually processing the hard
copy documents (see col. 14 lines 36-67 and col. 14 lines 1-19)”
(answer-page 9). Such reasoning does not appear to set forth a
good case for suggesting modifications to the artisan. The
examiner is not clear as to what modifications are being made to
each reference and what would have specifically led the artisan
to make those modification. Merely because Manduley may
integrate paper and electronic mail handling and Kolling may
disclose electronic statement presentation and Lech may create a
template and extract specific data from a paper document, that,
in and of itself, does not present a reason for any modification
of a reference by the teaching of another reference. The
examiner may give a reason why Lech employs a template, i.e.,
minimizing the need of manually processing, but this offers no
reason for any modification to the electronic bill presentation
of Kolling or to the paper/electronic mail handling system of
Manduley, based on the teachings of Lech.
Claim 26 is a bit different from the other claims in that it
stresses more of the bill generation system rather than the
extraction of specific data from paper bills. However, as above,
-12–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007