Appeal No. 2001-1018
Application 09/211,688
transaction is to be audited. If a customer’s transaction is
to be audited, the examiner has noted that the number of
scanned items will be re-entered “at the checkout terminal”
(answer, page 4). The examiner has additionally indicated
that the recitation “so as to allow said customer to enter
said number of items into said self-service checkout terminal
in response to generation of said audit-required control
signal,” as broadly claimed, “is not given any patentable
weight since the checkout terminal cannot distinct [sic,
distinguish] whether the customer or the cashier is going to
re-enter the number of scanned items” (answer, page 4).
Like appellants (brief, pages 27-32), we observe that the
examiner has not provided any guidance as to exactly where he
believes a “self-service checkout terminal” like that claimed
by appellants is to be found in GB ‘575. Nor has the examiner
pointed to any teaching in GB ‘575 relating to the requirement
in each of the method claims on appeal (claims 1, 13 and 18)
of “operating said self-service checkout terminal so as to
allow said customer to enter said number of items into said
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007