Appeal 2007-0223
Application 09/752,090
claimed, which are qualified as part of the supplier qualification. Thus,
qualifying the suppliers involves "qualifying technologies."
We conclude that Appellants have not shown that the Examiner erred
in finding that Aycock discloses "qualifying suppliers, parts, and
technologies."
(2)
The Examiner also finds that Aycock discloses the claim limitation of
"said collaborative source including a supplier, a manufacturing
representative, and . . . an electronic catalog" at column 1, lines 21-30, and
column 2, line 56, to column 3, line 22) (Final Rejection 2).
Appellants argue (Br. 11-12):
Aycock, however, is devoid of teaching a collaborative source. The
source of supplier information disclosed in Aycock is, at best, a
source; it is not a collaborative source. Aycock states "vendor
requirements are selected for vendor qualification . . . provided to a
supplier [and] . . . after receiving supplier responses to the
requirements, the supplier responses are assigned a scaled score"
(column 2, line 64 - column 3, line 4). Collaboration suggests more
than sending requests and receiving responses.
Appellants further argue that the "recognition by the examiner that
Aycock does not teach a web based user interface and shared data repository
lends strength to the Appellants['] contention that Aycock does not disclose
collaborative elements as referenced above" (Br. 12) because "[t]he web
based user interface and shared data repository . . . are integral components
and functions corresponding to these collaborative elements" (Br. 12).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013