Appeal No. 1998-1117
Application No. 08/220,756
that Yoshihiko further provides reasons to those skilled in
the art for combining the Yoshihiko shared cash handling
mechanism with Ito. Yoshihiko teaches on page 3 that there is
a need to minimize the number of motors, which are driving the
means actuating a teller machine or an automatic teller
machine, so as to save space and reduce cost. From these
findings by the Examiner of the prior art suggestions and
reasons, we find that the Examiner has made a proper prima
facie case in establishing that Appellant’s claim 1 is
properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Appellant further argues that Yoshihiko does not provide
means for handling requests received concurrently for both
bill ports. The Examiner agrees that Yoshihiko does not
specifically state that the operation is done concurrently and
independently. However, the Examiner points out that those
skilled in the art would recognize the need to process request
made concurrently.
We note that requests from devices to a shared controller
must be properly prioritized and handled so that these
requests are not lost was well known in the art. In
particular, we point to page 6 of Ito in which the shared
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007