Appeal No. 1998-2986
Application No. 08/344,390
page 4) that Teare teaches sending position and time
information at regular intervals for authentication.
Therefore, the examiner concludes that it would have been
obvious to use registration notifications in the method of
Cooper "to prevent unnecessary charges to the user."
Appellants argue (Brief, page 8) that Teare fails to
provide the missing limitations of Cooper. Appellants point
out (Brief, page 8) that Teare sends periodic position and
time records to a central facility where it is compared
against previously stored, preset position and time profiles.
If the information matches, then authorization is granted.
Even if one considers the information sent by Teare to be
registration notification, Teare still does not disclose or
suggest comparing such registration notification against
previously sent registration notification records, as Teare
compares the information with preset records. Accordingly, we
find no motivation in the prior art of record to take Cooper's
method of comparing the time of a call with the time of a
previous call by the same mobile phone and to modify it to
compare a registration notification record for a particular
phone with other registration notification records for the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007