Appeal No. 2002-2078
Application No. 09/209,211
jobs.” This refers to temporary help employees being given a
series of jobs, scheduling these jobs so that the employee can
expect “uninterrupted work at a series of jobs” (column 1, lines
19-20).
If the examiner is relying on the “stacking jobs” disclosure
of Stipanovich to meet the “substantially simultaneously” offered
jobs of the instant claimed invention, and we believe that is
just what the examiner is contending, we find the examiner’s
reasoning faulty in this regard. While it might be the case that
the temporary employee is simultaneously offered a series of jobs
to be taken on serially, Stipanovich is unclear that this is the
case. It may very well be that the temporary employee does not
even know from week to week where he/she will be employed next,
and so the employee has no knowledge of these jobs being offered
at the same time. The temporary employment agency has a
“stacking jobs” policy in order to keep the employee employed
uninterruptedly at a series of jobs, by appropriately scheduling
jobs for that employee, and the employee may even know of this
policy, but this appears quite different from the instant claimed
invention where a job candidate is offered all pertinent jobs in
a business entity substantially simultaneously so that the
candidate may choose one of those jobs.
-8–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007