Appeal No. 1999-1625
Application No. 08/792,468
Appellant did not contest the merits of the rejections in his
brief to the Federal Circuit, the issue is waived. Thus, we will
sustain the Examiner's rejection of claims 13 through 23.
Now we turn to the rejection of claims 27, 30 and 32 through
34 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Collins and
Gogulski. Appellants make the sole argument that,
neither Collins, Jr. '947 nor Gogulski suggest that a
consumer himself or herself perform the necessary steps
to purchase the commodity, and more particularly, the
steps of selecting a commodity, reading the commodity
code and paying for the commodity using a payment
processor attached to a transportable container, all at
a first selection site. See page 8, lines 23-37 of the
brief.
In addition, Appellants further state that "both Collins, Jr.
'947 and Gogulski require the use of a check-out station, a
cashier, a point-of-sales terminal, etc., to purchase
commodities." See page 8, lines 20 and 21 of the brief.
We find that Collins discloses that the invention "enables a
check-out operation to occur anywhere in the store where an
electrical receptacle 66 is located." See column 5, lines 49-51.
Therefore, we find that Collins' scanning system attached to a
cart (i.e., a transportable container) allows a purchaser to
select a first commodity to be purchased at a first selection
site, read the commodity code at said first selection site and
1010
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007