Appeal No. 2006-2952
Application No. 10/209,242
Sole pending claim 1 is reproduced as follows:
1. A method for evaluating, by generating a fitness measure value, a set of variable data
documents generated by an automatic document assembly process, a set of variable data
documents being a set of documents having a portion corresponding to a predetermined
content and a portion corresponding to a variable content, the predetermined content
being the same in each document of the set of variable data documents, comprising:
(a) inputting, through an input device, document specifications for a set of variable
data documents to be generated, the document specifications being represented as a set of
relative weights;
(b) generating, using a processor, an set of electronic variable data documents;
(c) executing, for each electronic variable data document, a set of value-property
functions to generate a set of value properties, said set of value-property functions
evaluating properties representing a good design;
(d) determining an inferred intent vector for each electronic variable data document
as a function of the set of calculated set of value properties, the inferred intent vector is
determined by a matrix multiplication applied to a vector of value properties; and
(e) generating a fitness measure value by multiplying components of the inferred
intent vector by a corresponding relative weight from the set of relative weights to
generate a set of products and summing the set of products.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Simon et al. (Simon) US 2002/0040375 Apr. 4, 2002
(filed Apr. 3, 2001)
Kim Marriott et al. (Marriott), “Fast and Efficient Client-Side Adaptivity for SVG,”
International World Wide Web Conference Proceedings of the eleventh international
conference on World Wide Web, Honolulu, Hawaii, 496-507 (2002).
Claim 1 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). As evidence of obviousness, the
examiner offers Marriott in view of Simon.
Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the examiner, we make reference
to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced
by the examiner and the evidence of obviousness relied upon by the examiner as support
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007