Appeal Number: 2006-2607
Application Number: 10/004,738
1 It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have
2 applied Watanabe’s ATM construction techniques to Amos because Watanabe
3 shows implementation details of ATM’s such as Amos. It would have been
4 obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have applied any of the wireless
5 communication techniques of Richardson to Amos because Richardson
6 demonstrates the notoriety of the wireless transmission taught by Amos, and also
7 teaches several implementation details for such wireless transmission. Therefore
8 we sustain the rejection of claim 15.
9 As regards claims 2 and 16, which add the limitation of a I/O device that
10 communicates through the wireless network, Amos’ keyboards and displays are
11 such devices that operate through Amos’ wireless network. Therefore we sustain
12 the rejection of claims 2 and 16.
13 As regards claims 3, 4, and 18, which add the limitation of connection to a
14 second network as well, Amos’ alternate embodiments of personal computers and
15 financial service institutions would provide such connections. Therefore we sustain
16 the rejection of claims 3, 4, and 18.
17 As regards claims 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, and 20, which add limitations of modes of
18 wireless transmission of infrared, radio waves and Bluetooth, relying on the 2.4 to
19 2.56 GHz spectrum, Richardson shows the notoriety of these modes, each of which
20 are art recognized equivalents to one another. Each of these modes has its own
21 strengths and weaknesses and would be selected according to routine optimization
22 within the specific context of Amos’ machines’ placement. Therefore we sustain
23 the rejection of claims 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, and 20.
24 As regards claim 19, which adds the limitation of accepting unsorted batches of
25 notes and coins, Watanabe specifically sorts the notes and coins that are deposited.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013