Appeal No. 96-3053
Application 08/113,194
This is a decision on the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the examiner's rejection of claims 9-14, which constitute
all the claims remaining in the application. We note that
appellant’s initial appeal brief indicated that claims 10 and 12
were to be cancelled and that the appeal was made with respect to
claims 9, 11, 13 and 14 [brief, page 1]. Notwithstanding this
indication, the appeal brief also presented arguments as to why
claims 10 and 12 were patentable. Because of these arguments,
the examiner did not cancel claims 10 and 12 and considered the
arguments against all the claims present in the application.
Therefore, we treat this appeal as being directed to the
rejection of all of claims 9-14.
The claimed invention pertains to a method and apparatus
for automatically settling payments between different autonomous
toll authorities. More particularly, tolls which have been paid
to one toll authority by a vehicle owner are automatically
transferred to a second toll authority when the vehicle uses the
toll facilities run by the second authority.
Representative claim 9 is reproduced as follows:
9. A method for automating inter Authority settlements
between a plurality of autonomous Authorities employing debited
electronic toll paying, without a central intervening third
party, is comprised of the steps of:
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007