Appeal 2006-3387
Application 09/385,489
independently verify the terms of the trade promotion and providing access after
the start of the trade promotion to allow the retailer and manufacturer to determine
at least a portion of the amount of money the manufacturer will owe the retailer
(Br. 60-61).
The Examiner found Jones teaches providing access to the independent
system operator database by the retailer and manufacturer to independently verify
the terms of the trade promotion (Answer 15, citing Jones, col. 12, ll. 10-40) and
providing access after the start of the trade promotion to allow the retailer and
manufacturer to determine at least a portion of the amount of money the
manufacturer will owe the retailer (Answer 16, citing Jones, col. 12, ll. 10-25).
Jones discloses sending a report of the incremental sale volume increases to
both the retailer and the manufacturer only after each event to support the
settlement process (Jones, col. 12, ll. 20-25). The Examiner has not pointed to, nor
do we find, any disclosure in Jones that its audit system is accessible independently
to the retailer and the manufacturer to verify the terms of the trade promotion prior
to the start of the trade promotion by the retailer, or to see the accruing amount of
money owed by the manufacturer during the trade promotion, as required by claim
30. Schultz does not appear to cure this deficiency in Jones. As such, we do not
find sufficient teaching, suggestion, or motivation in Jones and Schultz that would
have led one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to the
invention as recited in claim 30. Claims 31 and 32 depend from and further limit
claim 30, and as such, are also not obvious in view of Jones and Schultz.
27
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013