Appeal No. 96-1903
Application 08/263,368
a postage logo, 28 and 30 and roller 102, and means to print a
line of variable information, ink jet printing element 40.
APA discloses the use of fluorescent ink for postage indicia
and the other ink for printing other data to be machine
readable, [disclosure, page 1, lines 25 to 27]. Furthermore,
Auslander teaches that, in postage, the use of fluorescent
inks is common. We also take note that Calvi, like Hubbard,
discloses the use of a microprocessor to generate the variable
postage information. Therefore, it would have been obvious,
to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention, to use, in Hubbard, the fluorescent ink to print
the postage logo and the machine readable ink to print the
date and postage information in view of the above teachings of
APA and Auslander. We, therefore, sustain the Examiner’s
rejection of claim 9 over Hubbard, APA, Auslander and Calvi.
Since Appellant has not argued separately claims 10, 14, 15
and 18 which depend from this claim, their obviousness
rejection over Hubbard, APA, Auslander and Calvi is also
sustained.
Next, we consider the independent claim 1. After our
review of the Examiner’s rejection of claim 1, [supplemental
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007