Appeal 2006-3331
Application 10/829,797
22. The account holder also uses the voice-response unit to send an
authorization identifier to the bank device to verify that the account
holder is authorized to reserve a check (Tedesco, col. 6, ll. 40-42).
23. The bank device determines whether the authorization identifier
corresponds to at least one predetermined authorization identifier of the
financial account, such as may be stored in the account database
(Tedesco, col. 6, ll. 44-47).
24. As such, Tedesco clearly teaches transmitting check information (check
data including an account identifier) and access information
(authorization identifier) to a system for verification.
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
“Section 103 forbids issuance of a patent when ‘the differences between the
subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject
matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.’” KSR
Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1734, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1391 (2007).
The question of obviousness is resolved on the basis of underlying factual
determinations including (1) the scope and content of the prior art, (2) any
differences between the claimed subject matter and the prior art, (3) the level of
skill in the art, and (4) where in evidence, so-called secondary considerations.
Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18, 148 USPQ 459, 467 (1966). See
also KSR, 127 S.Ct. at 1734, 82 USPQ2d at 1391 (“While the sequence of these
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013