Appeal Number: 2006-2607
Application Number: 10/004,738
1 handling device, or a third device operating as a visual display (the inventory and
2 accounting management features of Amos).
3 Although Amos does not show the network operating according to a network
4 standard for locally distributed wireless networks operating without servers, it does
5 show that any network system may be used. A network standard for locally
6 distributed wireless networks operating without servers is a species that would be
7 immediately envisaged within the taught genus of all network systems, because of
8 its simplicity.
9 Watanabe serves to provide further evidence that an ATM such as that in Amos
10 would sort its contents and safeguard physical entry of coins and notes to ensure
11 each went to the proper device.
12 Richardson shows that such a simple network, coupled with wireless
13 communication, was notoriously well known at the time of the invention and could
14 operate within a range of no more than 100 meters from one of the first the first
15 cash handling device and the second cash handling device. The actual limitation of
16 separation of less than 100 meters does not affect the operation of the invention,
17 but only serves to indicate the field in which the applicants envision practicing the
18 invention. Whether the Appellants were the first to recognize a market for placing
19 cash machines within such a range is moot because this range is a species of the
20 genus of all ranges that wireless communications encompass, and Richardson
21 suggests the advantages of such proximity in the choices of implementation modes
22 available at the claimed ranges. Accordingly, this limitation is accorded minimal
23 patentable weight, and is recognized as a limitation that the applied prior art must
24 be capable of practicing.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013