Appeal 2007-0820
Application 09/734,808
1 7. The Specification further describes using the server as the
2 processor:
3 An authorized user then uses his PC,
4 mobile phone or television 10 to access the
5 Internet and an on-line store 11. The
6 authorized user selects an item or service for
7 purchase. The on-line store 11 requests a
8 credit card number. The bioauthentication
9 information (fingerprint, iris scan etc.) is
10 sent to the server 12. The server 12 locates
11 the correct credit card information and
12 checks whether the authorized user can
13 spend the amount requested. In one
14 embodiment, the authorized user informs the
15 server 12 of the amount to be spent and in
16 another embodiment the on-line store 11
17 gives the amount to the server. If
18 authorization is approved, the server 12
19 sends the on-line store 11 the credit card
20 information required to complete the sale.
21 (Specification 6:3-13.)
22 8. Because the scope of claim 5 is not limited to use of a “local”
23 processor, Nakano discloses all of the elements of claim 5
24 except for Nakano’s authentication information is not provided
25 by a bioauthentication device (Answer 3-5) (Appeal Br. 8-9).
26 9. The Examiner found that Harada discloses “bio-authentication
27 information as the identification information where [the]
28 bio-authentication device provides the bio-authentication
29 information that is a fingerprint (col 7, lines 19-23) further
30 where the sensor is on the remote control (col 7, lines 14-18)”
31 (Answer 6). Appellant did not traverse these findings by the
32 Examiner as to the scope and content of Harada (Appeal Br. 10-
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013