Appeal No. 2003-0238
Application No. 08/886,349
Appellant also asserts (Brief, page 6) that Dacko "teaches
against anything not expressed therein as to data collection
techniques available to market researchers." However, not
mentioning a particular method does not constitute a teaching
away from such. Further, appellant argues (Brief, pages 6-7)
that Dacko fails to teach or suggest Internet or on-line surveys.
In response we direct appellant's attention to the second method
given in Dacko's seventh method of computerized data collection.
In particular Dacko states (in paragraph 9), "Alternatively,
using interactive e-mail, researchers can send potential
respondents e-mail prompting them to access an address that
contains an interactive survey." To what, other than an Internet
address, could such "address" refer? Accordingly, we find
appellant's arguments regarding motivation to combine
unpersuasive.
As to claims 1 through 23, 25 through 37, and 48 through 51,
appellant (Brief, pages 7-8 and 11) directs our attention to the
survey notification message recited in one form or another in
each of independent claims 1, 10, 17, 28, and 49. Appellant
questions (Brief, page 9) whether
the single (four sentence) paragraph of . . . [Dacko]
really teach enough such that what is admittedly
patentable over . . . [Greenfield Online] magically
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007