Appeal No. 1998-3332 Page 3
Application No. 08/643,961
(d) generating a security code by encrypting
said single data sequence using a private secret key
of a kind for which decrypting using a public key
would allow authentication of the instrument, and
(e) affixing the personal data, and said at
least one of a picture and a signature of a
legitimate holder and said encrypted security code
to the instrument to provide a substantially
forgery-proof instrument.
Besides the appellants’ admitted prior art (AAPA), the
prior art of record relied on in rejecting the claims follows:
Bonicalzi et al. (Bonicalzi) 4,179,686 Dec.
18,
1979
Lee 4,180,207 Dec. 25,
1979
Silverman et al. (Silverman) 4,213,038 July
15, 1980
Nathans 4,972,476 Nov. 20,
1990
Petajan 4,975,960 Dec. 4,
1990.
Claims 11, 12, 16, 31, and 32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 as being obvious over Nathans, AAPA, and either Lee or
Silverman. Claims 3 and 13-15 stand rejected under § 103 as
being obvious over Nathans, Bonicalzi, AAPA, Petajan, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007