Appeal No. 2002-0819
Application No. 09/047,533
facility should complete the order, not whether the order should
be completed. We also disagree with the Examiner that estimated
time of arrival determines if the order would be filled (answer,
page 16) since the location of the mobile customer is not
compared to a predetermined geographical proximity. In fact, the
estimated time of arrival in combination with the other
information related to the location, availability of the service
and backlog in the facility merely facilitates scheduling by
determining which facility has the necessary stock and means for
completing the order within the customer’s needed time frame
(col. 9, lines 33-50).
Therefore, we agree with Appellant that the combination of
Morrill and Hall fails to teach or suggest that transferring of
the transaction amount is completed only if the customer mobile
station and the merchant terminal are within the predetermined
geographical proximity, as required by the independent claims.
Thus, assuming, arguendo, that it would have been obvious to
combine Morrill with Hall, as held by the Examiner, the
combination would still fall short of teaching the use of the
relative geographical proximity of the customer mobile station
and the merchant terminal as a condition for transferring the
transaction amount. As the Examiner has failed to set forth a
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007