Appeal No. 2006-0989
Application No. 09/802,634
browser link or a sponsoring website, and that the majority of the software and data
reside on a server, indicate that what is downloaded to the non-PC devices is not the
contents of the wallet such as financial account information but, rather, is the software
needed to access the wallet.
Thus, the examiner has not established that O’Leary discloses, or would have
fairly suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, the requirement for storing financial
account information on a personal device as set forth in the appellants’ independent
claims. The examiner does not rely upon Rallis, de la Huerga or official notice to
remedy this deficiency in O’Leary.
We therefore conclude that the examiner has not carried the burden of
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the appellants’ claimed invention.
DECISION
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1, 3-6, 9-13, 15-18, 21 and 23-26
over O’Leary in view of Rallis, and claims 2, 7, 14, 19, 22 and 27 over O’Leary in view of
Rallis, de la Huerga and official notice, are reversed.
REVERSED
TERRY J. OWENS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007