Appeal 2007-0025 Page 25
Application 09/792,151
Claims 4 and 12
Because Appellants argue claims 4 and 12 as a group, pursuant to the rules,
the Board selects representative claim 4 to decide the appeal with respect to this
rejection, and claim 12 will stand or fall with claim 4. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)
(2006). It reads as follows:
4. A method of providing advertising according to Claim 2 wherein said
external medium includes electronic cash information.
A. Issue
The issue is whether Appellants have shown error in the rejection of claim 4
on the ground that Dedrick, Angles, and Freeman do not to disclose all the claimed
limitations.
B. Findings of Fact
We incorporate herein the facts set forth in the Finding of Facts section for
the rejection of claims 2, 7-9, 15, and 16 above and add the following fact, all of
which the record supports by a preponderance of the evidence.
1. Appellants argue that “Claims 4 and 11 are patentable over the cited prior art
based upon at least the above-identified analysis. Specifically, the hypothetically
combined references fail to teach, suggest, or render obvious each and every
limitation of independent Claims 2 and 9, which Claims 4 and 11 depend from.”
(Appeal Br. 23).
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013