Appeal 2007-0820
Application 09/734,808
1 ll. 62-64) permitting the sub-user to conduct transactions up to
2 the maximum sub-user transaction amount (Dethloff, col. 13, ll.
3 19-21).
4 18. Dethloff states that instead of a PIN, a voice print (a type of
5 bioauthentication) may be used as the sub-user enabling code:
6 It is noted that while the PIN is given
7 as an example of cardholder and sub-user
8 enabling code, any other code can be used,
9 such as a voice print (to be stored as data
10 and input by the cardholder or sub-user) . . .
11 (Dethloff, col. 11, ll. 26-29.) Thus, Dethloff explicitly shows
12 that the substitution of alternative user authentication
13 techniques is known in the prior art. In particular, Dethloff
14 teaches that it was known in the art at the time of the invention
15 to substitute a PIN authentication with bioauthentication to
16 enable a user to access credit.
17 19. The art of consumer electronics devices evidences a common
18 usage of personal codes or personal identification numbers
19 (PINs) to identify or authenticate users (e.g., Nakano, col. 4,
20 ll. 42-45 and col. 5, ll. 39-42 and Dethloff, col. 10, ll. 59-67).
21 20. The art further shows that one of ordinary skill in the consumer
22 electronic device art at the time of the invention would have
23 been familiar with using bioauthentication information
24 interchangeably with or in lieu of PINs to authenticate users
25 (Harada, col. 7, ll. 14-23 and Dethloff, col. 11, ll. 26-29.)
26 21. It is also clear from an examination of the prior art that those of
27 ordinary skill in the consumer electronic device art at the time
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013