Appeal No. 2001-1000
Application No. 08/835,404
do we find that appellant has provided any evidence of commercial success or a “need
in the industry” of the invention as asserted by appellant. (See brief at pages 13-14.)
With this said, we agree with appellant that the examiner has not established a
prima facie case of obviousness and motivation to apply and extend the teachings of
Jones and PR Newswire to credit card transactions. Appellant argues that the examiner
has not provided any evidence in support of the conclusion of obviousness other than to
conclude that “if credit application transactions can be approved using a facsimile
machine, credit card transactions must be just as easy.” (See brief at page 14.)
Additionally, appellant argues that the type of credit being discussed in PR Newswire is
not a credit card transaction and that the procedures in getting a loan approved are
substantially different from getting a credit card transaction approved. (See brief at
page 15.) We agree with appellant that the examiner has not provided a clear teaching
or convincing line of reasoning for modifying the credit application process to suggest
the extension of the process to the processing of credit card transactions. Even if we
were to interpret the teachings of Jones to go to the initial credit application processing
to acquire a credit card, this would not meet the limitations of independent claim 1 since
there would be no “credit card transactions” prior to the issuance of the account and
credit card. Prior to the approval of the credit card application, there would be no credit
card transactions and neither Jones nor PR Newswire teach or fairly suggest the use of
their systems for transactions after the initial credit application approval. Therefore, we
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007