Skip to main content

Full text of "USPTO Patents Application 09876311"

See other formats


REMARKS 



Applicant respectfully requests favorable reconsideration in view of the foregoing 
amendments and the following remarks. Applicant submitted a Response to Office 
Action on May 29, 2008. In this Response, the claim status identifiers for several claims 
were inadvertently omitted. This Supplement Response corrects this error and re- 
presents the previously made claim amendments and arguments. 

By this amendment, claim 1 is amended, claim 7 is canceled, and new claims 20 
and 21 are added. One minor grammatical error is corrected in the specification. No 
new matter was added. 



Rejection under 35 USC §102 

Reconsideration of the rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 
§1 02(e) as being anticipated by Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 6,151,586) is respectfully 
requested in view of the amendment to claim 1 , the cancellation of claim 7, and for the 
following reasons. 

Claim 1 has been narrowed to include the following limitations: 

"awarding points to a member for each of the general programme 
areas in which the member participates, the points being allocated to 
members based on a multi-level system, including: 

a first level, wherein the member is awarded points for 
merely taking part in a programme area, 

a second level, wherein the member is awarded a greater 
number of points for taking part in all programme areas associated 



10 



with a disease with which the member is afflicted, and 

a third level, wherein the member is awarded points for 
attaining a minimum level for a measurable of a programme area 
associated with a disease with which the member is afflicted;" 

Brown fails to disclose all the steps of amended claim 1, including, in particular, 
the step having the newly added limitations quoted above. 

Furthermore, claims 2-6 depend upon independent claim 1, and because 
dependent claims recite all the limitations of an independent claim, it is believed, for this 
additional reason, that dependent claims 2-6 also recite in allowable form. 

Therefore, the Applicants believe that the rejection of claims 1-3 and 5-7 has 
been overcome. Thus, the Examiner should withdraw the rejection of these claims. 
Allowance of claims 1-3 and 5-6 is requested. 



Rejection under 35 USC §103 

Reconsideration of the rejection of claims 4, 14 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 
§1 03(a) as being unpatentable over Brown in view of Bro (U.S. Patent 5,722418) is 
respectfully requested in view of the amendment to claim 1 , and for the following 
reason. The combination of Brown and Bro fails to disclose all the steps of amended 
claim 1, including, in particular, the step having the newly added limitations quoted 
above. 

Furthermore, claims 4, Hand 15 depend upon independent claim 1, and 
because dependent claims recite all the limitations of an independent claim, it is 
believed, for this additional reason, that dependent claims 4, 14 and 15 are also in 
allowable form. 



11 



Accordingly, because the Brown and Bro references, alone or in combination, do 
not teach, anticipate, or suggest the presently claimed invention, the Applicants believe 
that the rejection of claims 4, 14 and 15 under 35 U.S.C. §1 03(a) has been overcome. 
Therefore, the Examiner should withdraw the rejection of these claims. 



Reconsideration of the rejection of claim 16, rejected under 35 U.S.C. §1 03(a) as 
being unpatentable over Brown in view of Bro, and further in view of Sehr (U.S. Patent 
6, 85,976) is respectfully requested in view of the amendment to claim 1 , and for the 
following reason. The combination of Brown, Bro and Sehr fails to disclose all the steps 
of amended claim 1, including, in particular, the step having the newly added limitations 
quoted above. 

Claims 16 depends upon independent claim 1, and because a dependent claim 
recites all the limitations of an independent claim, it is believed, for this additional 
reason, that dependent claim 16 also recites in allowable form. 

Accordingly, because the Brown, the Bro and the Sehr references, alone or in 
combination, do not teach, anticipate, or suggest the presently claimed invention, the 
Applicants believe that the rejection of claim 16 under 35 U.S.C. §1 03(a) has been 
overcome. Therefore, the Examiner should withdraw the rejection of this claim. 

CONCLUSION 

The foregoing is submitted as full and complete response to the Office Action 
dated November 30, 2007. It is believed that the application is now in condition for 
allowance. Allowance of claims 1-6, 14-16 and 20-21 is respectfully requested. 

No amendment made was related to the statutory requirements of patentability 
unless expressly stated herein. No amendment made was for the purpose of narrowing 
the scope of any claim, unless the Applicants have argued herein that such amendment 



12 



was made to distinguish over a particular reference or combination of references. 

Applicants acknowledge the continuing duty of candor and good faith to disclose 
information known to be material to the examination of this application. In accordance 
with 37 C.F.R §1 .56, all such information is dutifully made of record. The foreseeable 
equivalents of any territory surrendered by amendment are limited to the territory taught 
by the information of record. No other territory afforded by the doctrine of equivalents is 
knowingly surrendered and everything else is unforseeable at the time of this 
amendment by the Applicants and their attorneys. 

The Commissioner is hereby authorized to change any fees that may be required 
or credit any overpayment to Deposit Account 503410. In view of the preceding 
discussion, it is submitted that the claims are in condition for allowance. 
Reconsideration and re-examination is requested. 

PLEASE CALL the undersigned if the Examiner believes that there are any 
informalities that can be corrected by Examiner's amendment, or that in any way it 
would help expedite the prosecution of the patent application. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Date: October 15, 2008 By: /Paul Bianco / 

Paul D. Bianco, Reg. # 43,500 
Attorney for the Applicants 

Fleit, Gibbons, Gutman, 

Bongini & Bianco P.L. 

21355 East Dixie Highway, Suite 115 

Miami, Florida 33180 

Telephone No.: (305) 830-2600 

Facsimile No.: (305) 830-2605 

e-mail: PBianco@FGGBB.com 



13