Appeal No. 2003-0238
Application No. 08/886,349
becomes unpatentable? Just because a survey
participant would have to at some point be aware of a
survey does not mean that the operation (d) and its
various sub-operations are obvious to those skilled in
the art.
Appellant further argues (Brief, page 9) that Dacko fails to
suggest using the claimed survey notification message to inform
registered participants within a selected group to obtain and
complete a survey by accessing a predetermined website. Instead,
appellant asserts, Dacko pertains only to e-mail surveys, not to
Internet surveys.
First, we note that the length of the disclosure in Dacko is
irrelevant to the determination of patentability if the
disclosure teaches or suggests the limitations in question.
Second, as explained supra, Dacko directs certain registered
participants to an address where the survey is located, which
suggests e-mail notification of an on-line, or Internet, survey.
Therefore, to answer appellant's question, Dacko's four sentence
paragraph, along with the disclosure of Greenfield Online, does
teach enough to render the claimed subject matter unpatentable.
Accordingly, appellant's arguments regarding the claimed survey
notification message are not convincing.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007