Appeal No. 2006-1525
Application No. 10/221,694
is that of determining whether or not to send a currency item to an available location in
the store in dependence upon the denomination of that currency item and the level of
at least one denomination currently stored in the store, wherein a currency item of a
different denomination can instead be subsequently sent to said location. While Smeets
does indeed determine whether a coin denomination tray is full before sending a coin to
that tray, if the tray is full, no other denomination is going to that location. Therefore the
examiner’s argument is unpersuasive.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-16 and 18 as
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Smeets.
CONCLUSION
To summarize,
• The rejection of claims 1-15, 17, 18 and 20-22 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being
unpatentable as anticipated by Wennersten, is not sustained.
• The rejection of claims 1-16 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable as obvious over Smeets, is not sustained.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007