Appeal No. 2003-1631
Application No. 09/451,332
disclosing updating an estimated time of arrival by associating
characteristics of the goods with characteristics of a carrier.
Appellants argue that characterizing “location” as a
characteristic of both the specific goods and the second carrier
is inconsistent and does not allow combining information from the
source with information from the carrier to update an arrival
time estimate (brief, pages 7 & 8). In particular, Appellants
assert that Bush only queries a tracking module for a current
location which is then compared with a planned location (reply
brief, page 3) instead of associating the goods and the carrier
information for determining the updated arrival time for those
specific goods (reply brief, page 4).
In response to Appellants’ arguments, the Examiner asserts
that the first estimated arrival time is based only upon
information obtained from the second transmission whereas,
similarly, the second estimate is based only on the third
transmission (answer, page 9). The Examiner argues that the
actual location and the itinerary of the respective carrier in
Bush is the same as the claimed second and third transmissions
which are used to calculate an estimated time of arrival (id.).
The Examiner further asserts that the comparison of the actual
location of the package and the planned itinerary in Bush is also
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007