Appeal No. 96-3053
Application 08/113,194
transaction information, and extracting or processing the
appropriate toll amounts accordingly, are simply steps that fall
within the penumbra of activities performed either manually or in
a semi-automated fashion within existing systems of toll
collection and settlement” [answer, page 5]. We fail to see how
the steps of assigning an m/n address to form a message, batching
such m/n messages during preassigned time slots and synchronizing
assigned time slots to corresponding buslines fall within the
“penumbra” of activities performed by existing systems. This is
a mere conclusion of the examiner unsupported by the evidence of
record.
Since Hassett does not support the rejection of claim 9
as formulated by the examiner, we do not sustain the rejection of
claim 9. Claims 10 and 12 depend from claim 9 so that the
rejection of these claims is also not supported by Hassett.
Claim 13 has been treated by the examiner and appellant as
essentially equivalent to claims 9, 10 and 12. Therefore, the
rejection of claim 13 is not sustained for the same reasons
discussed above.
We now consider the rejection of claims 11 and 14 as
unpatentable over Hassett in view of Marker, Jr. or Arnold.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007