Appeal No. 2002-2258
Application No. 09/134,977
b) writing a record identifying said misprocessed
mailpiece in a common data store accessible by a data
processing system;
c) inputting said record to said data processing
system;
d) said data processing system regenerating a control
document associated with said misprocessed mailpiece in
accordance with said record, said control document
specifying assembly of said misprocessed mailpiece;
e) inputting said regenerated control document to said
inserter system;
f) said inserter system assembling another mailpiece
substantially in accordance with specifications for
said misprocessed mailpiece on said regenerated control
document.
The following references are relied on by the examiner:
Schneiderhan 5,067,088 Nov. 19, 1991
Baker et al. (Baker) 5,175,691 Dec. 29, 1992
In what we shall consider as a first stated rejection,
claims 15, 19, 21 through 25 and 27 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Baker. In a second
stated rejection, this reference is used to reject claims 15, 19
and 21 through 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. In a third stated
rejection, the examiner utilizes Schneiderhan to reject under
35 U.S.C. 102(b) claims 15 through 18, 21 and 24. Schneiderhan
in turn is used as the basis to reject claims 15 through 18 and
21 through 25 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Finally, in a fifth stated
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007