Appeal No. 2003-2165 Page 14
Application No. 09/067,093
automatically uploading said merchandise code into the database and
comparing by the database the captured code against said merchandise
list comprising said restricted merchandise code; and
if the captured code matches said restricted merchandise code stored in
the database list, then automatically requesting by the database fulfillment
of said specific condition. . . .
Giving effect to every limitation, the claim requires attaching a code to goods or services
to indicate that a condition must be fulfilled for sale thereof; adding the code to
a database; when a particular good or service is presented for purchase, automatically
capturing the code previously attached to the particular good or service; comparing the
captured code against the contents of the database; and, if the captured code matches
a code in the database, automatically requesting fulfillment of the specific condition.
2. Obviousness Determination
At the outset, we do not understand how the examiner proposes to modify
Messina. Specifically, we fail to grasp the meaning of his assertion that "the disclosure
of Messina . . . would have been selected in accordance with 'earmarking with a
restricted code also into a merchandise list included in a merchant database'. . . ."
(Examiner's Answer at 9.) We decline to engage "speculations and assumptions," In re
Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 862, 134 USPQ 292, 295 (CCPA 1962), in interpreting the
rejection.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007