Appeal No. 2001-1862
Application No. 09/102,044
examiner concerning the “Official Notice” and the “old and well-known facts.” In a
response to the Final Rejection, Paper No. 22, filed Mar. 23, 2000 and in the principal
Appeal Brief, appellants did not contest those facts as being old and well-known.
Rather, appellants elected to argue that the examiner has addressed each claim
limitation in isolation rather treating the claimed invention as a whole and that the
examiner has not addressed the collective motivations to modify the teachings of Your
Choice for the combination of modifications. (See brief at pages 8 et seq.) We agree
with appellants.
Contrary to the combination argument, appellants argue in the Reply Brief and at
the Oral Hearing, by appellants’ representative, that there was no evidence of these
facts which the examiner maintained as being “old and well-known.” (See reply brief at
page 2.) For instance, at the Oral Hearing, appellants’ representative argued that there
is no evidence in Your Choice whether there is a determination that an individual
purchaser has sufficient funds to pay for the stored value card(s). We find that
appellants’ arguments are not timely made and furthermore, we disagree with
appellants that the basic building blocks of the business of credit and debit card
issuance and processing are not old and well-known facts known to those skilled in the
art. We agree with the examiner that these well-known facts would have been readily
apparent to skilled artisans.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007