3
Appeal No. 2005-0748
Application No. 09/190,727
combining the first consumer’s purchase data with the second consumer’s purchase
data;
anonymizing the purchase data from the first and second consumers’ orders into
anonymous data; and
transmitting the anonymous data to the at least one merchant wherein the combining
and anonymizing steps are performed independently of any input from the first or second
consumer.
THE PRIOR ART
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Low et al. (Low) 5,420,926 May 30, 1995
Goldhaber et al. (Goldhaber) 5,794,210 Aug. 11, 1998
O’Neil et al. (O’Neil) 5,987,440 Nov. 16, 1999
THE REJECTIONS
Claims 22 and 24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as being unpatentable
over Goldhaber in view of O’Neil.
Claim 23 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as being unpatentable over
Goldhaber in view of O’Neil and further in view of Low.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the appellants and
the examiner regarding the above noted rejections, we refer to the examiner’s answer
(mailed September 7, 2004) and appellants’ brief (filed June 23, 2004) for a full
exposition thereof.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007