Appeal No. 2005-0823
Application No. 10/300,895 Page 52
ticket is construed by us as meaning that the reporting is done
at the same time the ticket is issued. We do not find this to be
inconsistent with claim 1, from which claim 66 depends because
the language "reporting the issuance of the travel ticket
externally and by the following day" provides for reporting
before the day following the issuance of the ticket.
From the disclosure of IATA of having “all ticketing
activity reported as it occurs”, we find that moving to reporting
at the time of issuance of the travel ticket would have been
obvious to an artisan. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 66,
and claims 74, 82, 90, 98, 106, 114 and 122 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) is affirmed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
64, 72, 80, 88, 96, 104, 112 and 120 under 35 U.S.C. § 112,
second paragraph, is reversed. The decision of the examiner to
reject claims 1-3, 7, 8, 10-12, 14, 15, 20, 37-39, 43, 44, 46,
48, 50, 51, 56, 62-66, 70-74, 78-82, 86-90, 94-98, 102-106, 110-
114, and 118-122 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is affirmed. The
rejection of claims 9, 19, 45 and 55 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) is
reversed.
Page: Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007