Appeal No. 2005-0473
Application No. 09/514,946
necessary teachings and suggestions related to the claimed
creating a tailored promotion of goods and/or services offered by
the subscriber network site in response to a consumer identifier
information, as recited in independent claims 1 and 22 are not
shown. Accordingly, based on the weight of the evidence and the
arguments presented by the Examiner and Appellant, we are
constrained to reverse the Examiner’s decision and not sustain
the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1, 3-10, and 22-25.
We note that the Examiner, in rejecting claim 8, in
alternative, relies on the combination of Gardenswartz and Travis
which neither includes any teaching that reads on the disputed
claimed features nor provides any suggestion for storing and
using products and goods reviewed information in conjunction with
the goods and services promotion data by a server. Accordingly,
we do not sustain the alternate 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of
claim 8.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007