Appeal No. 2003-2167 Page 8
Application No. 09/903,500
the above noted modification of Comesanas would result in a method which
corresponds to the method recited in claim 18 in all respects.
The appellant does not dispute the obviousness of the above-noted modification
of Comesanas, however, the appellant does argue throughout both briefs that such a
modification of Comesanas would not result in a method which corresponds to the
method recited in claim 18 in all respects. Specifically, the appellant argues that
Comesanas does not teach or suggest "prescribing delivery preferences for said billing
information" and "associating said delivery preferences with said billing information to
determine if said billing information is to be transmitted via printed transmission or
electronic transmission." We do not agree.
In our view, the teachings of Comesanas, taken as a whole, instructs an artisan
that the debtor/customer chooses the delivery manner from the choices provided by the
biller. In this instance, Comesanas teaches that the biller provides three choices for
delivery of the invoice as follows: (1) by mail without a pre-paid envelope; (2) by mail
with a pre-paid envelope with the invoice reflecting the cost of the pre-paid envelope;
and (3) by electronic transmission with the invoice reflecting the transmittal charges of
the electronic transmission. Comesanas then teaches that the biller utilizes the
selected delivery choice for transmitting the invoice to the debtor/customer. As such,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007