Appeal No. 2004-1267
Application No. 08/873,974
We find appellants’ arguments insufficient to overcome the
examiner’s reasonable explanation that Narasimhan suggests, at
column 4, lines 62-65, and column 8, lines 4-13, providing for
certain geographic-specific promotions to consumers. Again,
appellants do not appear to have addressed the specific teachings
of Narasimhan, as pointed out by the examiner. Appellants’ mere
assertion that there is no evidence supporting the examiner’s
rationale, or that the examiner’s conclusions are “vague,” fails
to point out the error in the examiner’s position that Narasimhan
clearly suggests using geographic-specific promotions.
Having responded to each and every assertion made by
appellants in the Request for Rehearing, filed August 6, 2004,
and finding nothing persuasive therein, we decline to make any
modification to our decision of July 29, 2004. Appellants’
request for rehearing is granted to the extent that we have
reviewed and reconsidered our decision and the evidence of
record, but the request is denied with respect to making any
changes therein.
-5–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007