Appeal No. 2001-2627
Application No. 09/472,658
Upon careful review, we fail to find that the Examiner has
provided requisite findings or reasons in Fernandez-Holmann for
these limitations. Thereby, we will not sustain the rejection of
claims 1 through 21 and 50 through 60 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Turning to group II, we note that claims 22, 25 through 28
and 31 through 33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Fernandez-Holmann. Because the Appellant has
grouped and argued these claims as one group, we will treat
claims 22, 25 through 28 and 31 through 33 as standing or falling
together and we will treat claim 22 as the representative claim
of that group.
Appellant argues on pages 14 and 15 of the brief that the
Examiner erred in the rejection of claim 22 because the claimed
limitations, "in response to an otherwise unrelated transaction
authoring funds transfer from a checking account" have not been
identified in the prior art. Appellant argues that Fernandez-
Holmann teaches that funds can be directed from a credit card to
a savings vehicle but does not teach funds to be directed from a
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007