Ex parte KIM et al. - Page 2




              Appeal No. 1999-1342                                                                                         
              Application 08/568,232                                                                                       



                     central processing means for storing identification information about a plurality of                  
              drivers and corresponding traffic-related information, and for processing information                        
              transmitted thereto;                                                                                         
                     portable terminal means for processing the identification information on a driver                     
              and fine payment information using said driver's card by selectively communicating                           
              on-line or off-line with said central processing means; and                                                  
                     interface means for outputting a result of the traffic-related business processed by                  
              said portable terminal means.                                                                                

                     The following reference is relied on by the examiner:                                                 
              Eisenmann                           5,459,304                    Oct. 17, 1995                               
                                                                 (filing date of Sept. 13, 1994)                           
                     Claims 1 and 3 through 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As evidence of                       
              obviousness, the examiner relies upon Eisenmann alone.                                                       
                     Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the examiner, reference is                     
              made to the briefs and the answer for the respective details thereof.                                        


                                                        OPINION                                                            
                     From our study of the positions of the appellants, the examiner and the teachings                     
              and suggestions in Eisenmann, as well as the claimed subject matter of all claims on                         
              appeal, we sustain the rejection of claims 3 through 5, but reverse the rejection of claims 1                
              and 6 through 13.                                                                                            


                                                            2                                                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007