Appeal No. 2003-1052
Application 09/222,644
From our study of Cordery, appellants' observations are
correct in the three principal arguments set forth at pages 10
and 11 of the principal brief on appeal that this reference
requires for the generation of any indicia to be printed the
inclusion of the addressee information in the indicia itself,
that closed-system meters do not generally have the capability to
perform address cleansing with a feature of dependent claim 3
providing a corrected postal code and that Cordery's system
prints other indicia other than the Postal Revenue Block itself,
a feature indicative of open rather than closed systems.
Appellants have also stated at page 2 of the reply brief
that "the definitions of closed and open meter systems used by
Appellant to characterize the system of Cordery et al. are
promulgated by the United States Post Office, and are well known
to one skilled in the art." Appellants also emphasize in their
reply brief repeatedly that Cordery's system requires the
inclusion of addressee information in the encrypted evidence of
postage printed on the mailpiece for subsequent verification by
the U.S. Postal Service.
We also reproduce the following from page 4 of the reply
brief:
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007