Appeal No. 2006-0987
Application 10/011,818
Claims 33-57 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Klein
in view of official notice supported by Hoffman.
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejection. We need to address only the sole
independent claim, i.e., claim 33.
Klein discloses a method for registering and managing consumer product warranty
information and for facilitating the return of lost products to their owners (¶¶ 0010 and 0011).
A lost product or a product needing warranty service is brought to a courier service which
reads an RFID identification tag that is affixed to the product and tells the courier service
where to send the product
(¶¶ 0020 and 0021).
The portion of Hoffman relied upon by the examiner (answer, page 8) discloses that
companies such as United Parcel Service have large easel-type displays for entry of
signatures thereon and verification that products have been received (¶ 0004).
In response to the appellant’s argument that Klein does not disclose a product order
from a first location, an order confirmation message, or a request to return the product from
the first location (brief, pages 7-8), the examiner argues that ordering a product from a first
location, sending an order confirmation message, and requesting to return the product from
the first location can take place when a product is purchased from Best Buy (answer, pages
9-11). The examiner, however, does not support that argument with evidence. The
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007