Appeal No. 03-2051 Page 2
Application No. 09/127,183
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to an enhanced payout feature for gaming
machines. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of
exemplary claim 23, which has been reproduced below.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Smith III et al. (Smith) 4,504,062 Mar.12, 1985
UK Patent Application (McArthur) 2 211 975 A Jul. 12, 1989
Claims 3-8 and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated
by McArthur.
Claims 10-15, 24 and 25 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over McArthur in view of Smith.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the Answer
(Paper No. 28) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejections, and
to the Brief (Paper No. 27) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007