Appeal No. 1998-2870
Application 08/429,954
receive programming data from the information retrieving device
(the magnetic card reader) or from a cable connector as claimed.
Method claims 26-31
The method claims do not recite that the CPU enables the
programming of the memory. For the reasons discussed in
connection with the independent apparatus claims, we conclude
that it would have been obvious in view of Snyder to make the
amenities service device of Biggs as a separate external device,
connected between the standard telephone (response device) and
the external apparatus. Also, for the reasons discussed in
connection with the independent apparatus claims, we find that
Biggs discloses that the telephone (response device) can transmit
signals while the telephone/amenities service device system is
enabled and conclude that it would have been obvious for one of
ordinary skill in the art to preserve this functionality in
making the amenities service device as a separate, externally
connected device; i.e., the only modification proposed is making
the device in Biggs as a separate, externally connected device as
shown in Snyder, not incorporating the circuitry of Snyder.
Still further, for the reasons discussed in connection with the
independent apparatus claims, we find that in the "stand-by" or
"sleep" mode, the micro controller 52 of Snyder, corresponding to
the claimed CPU, is enabled and the telephone is active to
- 14 -
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007