Appeal No. 2004-0831
Application 09/650,176
funds stored therein and determines and deducts a proper postage
value from the register funds when a piece of mail is postmarked,
we see nothing in Windel that relates at all to appellants’
claimed method for generating an electronic certificate for a
digital message, wherein the method includes the steps of
obtaining a message digest of the digital message; assembling
contents for the certificate, with said contents including the
message digest; determining if sufficient finds are present in
the register for signing the electronic certificate contents; and
signing the electronic certificate, as in appellants’ claim 35.
Even if we assume the security imprint of Windel is broadly
a “certificate,” as contended by the examiner, deducting of funds
from the register in Windel is for the proper postage value
determined for the particular mail piece being mailed, and not
for the security imprint or “certificate” applied as part of the
postmark on the physical piece of mail. Moreover, there is no
signing of the security imprint or “certificate” in Windel, nor
obviously any determining or deducting of funds in the register
for signing the “certificate.”
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007