Appeal No. 2005-0903
Application 10/170,305
An obviousness analysis commences with a review and
consideration of all the pertinent evidence and arguments. “In
reviewing the [E]xaminer’s decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and argument.” Oetiker,
977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. “[T]he Board must not only
assure that the requisite findings are made, based on evidence of
record, but must also explain the reasoning by which the findings
are deemed to support the agency’s conclusion.” In re Lee, 277
F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430, 1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
With respect to independent claim 1, Appellants argue West
“fails to provide obtaining event data or data related to a
product or service promoted at the event.” We find this argument
unpersuasive. West clearly teaches at paragraph 0010 that the
system is “seeking information associated with products,
services, and/or other areas of sought-after information.” We
find that this meets the claim preamble limitation of “at least
one of an event, a product and a service promoted at the event”
for any one of the following three reasons.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007