Appeal No. 2004-0297
Application No. 09/265,451
transaction to the universal electronic transaction card. For
the reasons discussed above in connection with claim 48, this
argument is not persuasive. Accordingly, we shall sustain the
standing 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claim 67 as being
unpatentable over Tamada in view of Danielson and Hale.
Claim 68
Claim 68 depends from claim 67 and requires the step of
storing transactional information for a credit transaction in the
universal electronic transaction card. For the reasons discussed
above in connection with claim 48, this argument is not
convincing. Therefore, we shall sustain the standing 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) rejection of claim 68 as being unpatentable over Tamada
in view of Danielson and Hale.
Claims 69 and 70
Claim 69 depends from claim 67 and requires a step of
establishing an electronic communication between the universal
electronic transaction card and a point of sale transaction
system that occurs before establishing an electronic
communication between the point of sale transaction system and a
service institution system. Claim 70 depends from claim 67 and
requires a step of establishing an electronic communication
between a point of sale transaction system and a service
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007