Appeal No. 2005-1632
Application No. 10/448,194
association with said retail customer identification to said first retailer POS system
during said transaction; and
wherein, upon receipt by said first retailer POS system of said incentive
offer in association with said retail customer identification transmitted from said central
incentive computer, said retailer POS system transmits said specification of said
incentive offer to said at least one POS terminal during said transaction so that said
incentive offer can be provided to said retail customer having said retail customer
identification while said retail customer is at said at least one POS terminal in
connection with said transaction.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Deaton et al. (Deaton) 5,642,485 Jun. 24, 1997
Claims 68-73, 75-83, 85-93, and 95-97 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as
being anticipated by Deaton.
Claims 74, 84, and 94 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Deaton.
We refer to the Final Rejection (mailed Apr. 26, 2004) and the Examiner’s
Answer (mailed Dec. 16, 2004) for a statement of the examiner’s position and to the
Brief (filed Sep. 23, 2004) and the Reply Brief (filed Feb. 16, 2005) for appellant’s
position with respect to the claims which stand rejected.
OPINION
Appellant places headings over groups of claims in the Brief, suggesting that
appellant believes the claims as grouped to be separately patentable. However, with
the possible exception of one argument relating to dependent claims (73, 83, and 93)
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007