Appeal No. 2006-2039 Παγε 4
Application No. 09/520,763
(specification at page 5, Figure 1). The services are provided in a hierarchical manner
from the core, affiliated and non-affiliated groups (see Figure 3).
We turn first to the examiner’s rejection of claims 58 to 64, 66 to 72, 74
and 75 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Moran in view of McGovern
and VPForum. The examiner finds that Moran discloses the invention as claimed
except that Moran does not explicitly disclose classifying service providers in a
hierarchical manner from the core service provider group, the affiliated service provider
group and the non-affiliated service provider group in response to the received client
data, assigning a plurality of services to a plurality of provider groups wherein whether
each service is needed by the client on a frequent basis and the value of the service are
determined and the services are categorized into a core, affiliated and non-affiliated
service provider [answer at page 4]. The examiner relies on McGovern for teaching
automatic searches of candidates to match customer’s needs and presenting the
candidates in ranking relative to the client’s needs. In addition, the examiner relies on
VP Forum for teaching that a lead manager determines the professionals the high net
worth individual needs and makes assignments and referrals. The examiner concludes:
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the
art at the time the invention was made to automate the
needs analysis and referral system to include ranking
features based frequency of client need especially in
customer relationship management systems, since it has
been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic
means to replace manual activity that has accomplished that
same result involves only routine skill in the art . . . Thus, it
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007