Appeal No. 2005-0007
Application 09/364,675
caller is in good standing, as recited in the independent claims
24, 31, 32 and 39.”
Appellant argues (brief, pages 7 through 12) that the term
“travel cards” is used in both the preamble as well as the body
of the claims to merely indicate “an exemplary use and does not
so limit the scope of the claims.” Appellant additionally argues
(brief, page 13) that a PIN number can be any one of the several
forms of identification (e.g., social security number, driver’s
license number or credit card number) listed in appellant’s
specification.
At the outset, we agree with appellant’s latter argument. A
PIN number can be any sequence of alphanumeric characters to
identify someone during a transaction. Since a PIN number can be
virtually anything keyed into the system for recognition of the
user by the system, we find that appellant’s disclosed system
uses the above-noted forms of identification as a PIN number as
set forth in the claims on appeal. Thus, the mere fact that
appellant’s specification does not call the above-noted numbers a
PIN number is not fatal to appellant’s quest to label such
numbers as PIN numbers.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007