Appeal No. 1999-1722
Application No. 08/729,602
Rejections (2), (3), (4) and (6)
The additional references applied in these rejections do
not supply the above-discussed deficiencies in the combination
of Legras and Wahlberg. Rejections (2), (3), (4) and (6)
therefore will not be sustained.
Rejection (5)
In this rejection, the examiner applies Wahlberg in
essentially the same manner as in rejection (1), supra.
Dabrowski ‘728 discloses a bill validating unit which can be
retrofitted into a coin-accepting gaming machine. Contrary to
appellants’ argument on page 27 of the brief, the retrofitted
machine can accept both coins and bills; see the first three
lines of claim 2 of Dabrowski ‘728. Nevertheless, although
the Dabrowski ‘728 machine does dispense coins, the
retrofitted bill accepting assembly is a relatively simple
unit, so that the conversion can be done on location (col. 2,
lines 64 to 66).
Even assuming that it would have been obvious from Wahlberg’s
disclosure of a vending machine which gives change in bills
and/or coins to modify a gaming machine to pay off in bills
and/or coins, and further assuming that one of ordinary skill
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007