Appeal No. 2004-0199
Application No. 09/385,489
the traded promotion in the electronic database of the
independent system."
Appellants also argue that Jones does not disclose "enabling
the retailer and manufacturer to access the electronic database
of the independent system to determine the stored terms of the
trade promotions." See pages 26 and 27 of Appellants' brief.
As pointed out above, we have found that Jones does teach
capturing and storing terms of the trade promotion in an
electronic database of the independent system. Jones further
teaches that the electronic database of the stored terms of the
trade promotion are retained in a history file for a
predetermined period, perhaps 52 weeks. See Jones, column 12,
lines 14-16. Jones further teaches that predetermined and
customized reports of the file is sent to both the retailer and
the manufacturer. See Jones, column 12, lines 20-25. Thus, by
retaining the files for 52 weeks and providing reports of the
files, Jones teaches a method of enabling the retailer and the
manufacturer to access the electronic database file to determine
the stored terms of the trade promotions. Therefore, we find
that Jones teaches all the limitations as recited in Appellants's
claim 33. Therefore, we will sustain the Examiner's rejection of
claims 33-36 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
1212
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007