Appeal No. 2003-0072
Application No. 09/032,407
by the second party.” Claim 22 describes it as a “certificate
that is digitally signed by the opening bank and which includes
an identifier and a reference to the LOC...” To find a teaching
of this claimed certificate, the examiner refers to Rosen 518, at
column 5, lines 40-41, wherein an “Issuer Certificate 16" is
mentioned. However, the examiner does not adequately explain how
this is equivalent to a “commercial relationship certificate,” as
defined by instant claim 1 or to the certificates defined by
instant claims 20 and 22.
Moreover, while the examiner contends that various portions
of the various references teach the various claimed elements,
pointing to various portions of the references, the examiner does
not specifically identify how these recitations in the references
specifically relate to the claimed elements nor does the examiner
adequately explain what would have led an artisan to combine the
various references.
This is especially important since the instant claimed
invention is directed to performing electronic commerce
transactions over an unsecure network without requiring
encryption. Yet, the portion of Ginter relied upon, in column
224, is under the heading of “Cryptographic Sealing. Moreover,
while the examiner appears to admit that Ginter does not
-8–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007