Appeal No. 2003-1632
Application 09/173,991
These include the verification and entry of the suitable
cryptographic key which is discussed at columns 15 and 16
relating to the public key system relied upon by Chaum
specifically as taught there from the prior art discussion
at column 5. The acceptability or unacceptability of the
bidirectional communications is discussed in greater detail in
the remaining parts of the reference and shown in figure 5.
Table 1 at column 17 indicates the transmit identification is
identified in certain frames as well as the validity status as an
acknowledgment or nonacknowledgment capability of the respective
subelements communicating with each other.
Since we have found that Chaum teaches within
35 U.S.C. § 102 the disputed features of representative inde-
pendent claims 40 and 70 argued by appellants in the Brief and
Reply Brief, we sustain the rejection of respective independent
claims 40, 46, 70 and 73 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as well
as their corresponding dependent claims rejected under this
statutory basis and under 35 U.S.C. § 103. On the other hand, we
have not sustained the rejection of independent claims 56 and 60
under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and their corresponding dependent claims
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and 35 U.S.C. § 103. As such, the
decision of the examiner is affirmed-in-part.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007