Appeal 2007-0223
Application 09/752,090
The first issue is whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner
erred in finding that Aycock discloses "qualifying suppliers, parts, and
technologies."
Aycock discloses an apparatus and method for "interactive evaluation
of suppliers as proposed vendors for a project" (Abstract), "vendor
qualification" (col. 1, ll. 11-56), and a "system for the evaluation of suppliers
for a project" (col. 3, ll. 43-44). Therefore, Aycock discloses "qualifying
suppliers."
Aycock discloses that an "important consideration in vendor
qualification is quality (a product and/or service free from defects) and
reliability (a product having a relatively long mean time between failures)"
(col. 1, ll. 32-35). Aycock discloses that "[t]he on-site audit includes
validating the supplier responses to the RFP/RFQ, either by performing
actual tests on hardware or software systems, and/or by reviewing the
quality control procedures and processes at the supplier site" (col. 8,
ll. 27-31). Thus, qualifying the suppliers can involve "qualifying parts,"
where the parts can be hardware or software.
Aycock discloses that "the request for proposal/request for quotation
(RFP/RFQ) . . . includes requirements for technical specifications" (col. 6,
ll. 1-3), where the Examiner finds the "technical specification" to correspond
to "technologies" (Answer 4). We find no error in the Examiner's position
that "technical specifications" can be considered "technologies," as broadly
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013