Appeal 2007-0518
Application 90/006,969
which data the Examiner has failed to demonstrate would in fact be used to
determine a tax payer’s tax liability.
For all of these reasons, the Examiner’s conclusory assertion that the
data collected from the bank must necessarily or inherently be data that is
used to process a tax payer’s liability is not supported by record evidence.
As applied by the Examiner (FF 16, 17 and 27-29), neither “It’s W-2
Time” nor the official notice taken make up for the deficiencies of Beamer.
For all of these reasons, we will not sustain the Examiner’s rejection
of the claims based on the prior art of record.
F. Decision
Upon consideration of the record, and for the reasons given, the
Examiner’s rejections are reversed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 31-40 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first
paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement is
reversed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 31-40 under 35 U.S.C. 112,
second paragraph, as being indefinite is reversed.
The Examiner’s rejection of claims 1-3, 5, 10, 31, 32, 34, 35, and
37-40 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Beamer as further
supported by “It’s W-2 Time” is reversed.
26
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013