Ex Parte Yanase et al - Page 23



            Appeal 2007-0025                                                     Page 23                     
            Application 09/792,151                                                                           

            settlement of accounts for said product or service” (Answer 11).                                 
            3.     The Examiner relied on Angles to show as known                                            
                   varying rates for advertisements according to advertisement success (col                  
                   20, lines 30-34), settling accounts according to the success of advertisements            
                   intended to incite purchase (col 20, lines 17-37; col 20, lines 55-64), and that          
                   the advertisements are intended to incite purchase from a user (col 2, lines              
                   29-42). Angles further discloses confirming the advertising information                   
                   recorded on said external medium is advertising for a product that is handled             
                   at this online store, and reflecting this in the settlement of accounts for said          
                   product or service (col 2, lines 30-35; col 20, lines 20-37).                             
            (Answer 11).                                                                                     
            4.     Appellants argued that                                                                    
                   … the hypothetically combined references also fail to teach                               
                   "confirming that the advertising information recorded on said external                    
                   medium is for advertising a product or service that is handled at this store;             
                   and reflecting a bonus in the settlement of the account for said product or               
                   service", as recited in Claim 3 and similarly recited in Claim 11.                        
                         Appellants respectfully submit that the Examiner's rejection is without             
                   merit and fails to address the claim limitation as recited. Specifically, the             
                   Examiner avers that Angles discloses varying rates for advertisements                     
                   according to advertising success, See page 10, yet the limitation recited is              
                   regarding confirming that the advertising information recorded is for the                 
                   product or service that is handled at the store. The identified sections in               
                   Angles discuss success of the advertisement based upon viewing of the                     
                   advertisement and requests for additional advertising information. Angles                 
                   does not mention products or services purchased or products or services for               
                   a particular store. Accordingly, Appellants submit that the references fail to            
                   teach, suggest, or render obvious this limitation as recited in Claims 3 and              
                   11. [Emphasis added.]                                                                     
            (Appeal Br. 20).                                                                                 






Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013