Appeal No. 1999-1780
Application No. 08/651,630
here is one of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). In light
of the above, we conclude that the examiner has not established
a prima facie case of anticipation of claim 37 based on Lohrey.
We therefore shall not sustain the standing anticipation
rejection of claim 37, or of claims 38-41, 44, 45 and 54 that
depend from claim 37.
Independent claim 46
Independent claim 46 is directed to an item processing
kiosk comprising:
identifying means for identifying, in response to
data supplied directly by a customer, the customer and
an item to be dropped off by the customer; and
message transmitting means, responsive to the
identifying means, for electronically transmitting a
message to an item holding area in order to notify a
holding area attendant of the identified item, wherein
the message provides a notification to the holding
area attendant of the customer and the item.
We find that the customer interface panel illustrated in
Figure 2 of Lohrey, which includes credit card reader 34,
constitutes an “identifying means” for identifying, in response
to data supplied directly by a customer, the customer and an
item to be dropped off by the customer. We further find that
the central processing plant 50 of Lohrey’s system, where items
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007