Appeal 2007-1554
Application 10/844,387
Moreover, in Robinson, the merchant may not have direct control over the
transaction. Robinson discloses that the merchant computer 98 responsible for
generating the digital receipt, “may in fact be operated not directly by the merchant
but rather by an electronic transaction service provider in close cooperation with
and under the authority of the merchant” (Robinson, col. 7, ll. 39-42). This is an
indication, if not a suggestion, that the merchant in Robinson may delegate to a
third party the day to day operations of the transaction process.
Further, we find that at the time of the invention, independent web payment
options existed for e-commerce transactions provided by, e.g., “credit card
accounts, debit card accounts, a PayPal account, or another method of transferring
funds electronically” (Specification 3:18-20).
From Ginter, a person with ordinary skill in the art knows the scope and
content of the prior art to include a third party agent or go-between 4700 which
collects data from a transaction as it is inputted.
The processes of digitally signing, encrypting, and forming a digital receipt
were known at the time of the invention as described by Robinson as well as
independent web based payment processes such as PayPal (Specification 3:18-20) .
“[P]roof of what was old and in general use at the time of the alleged
invention…may be admitted to show what was then old, or to distinguish what is
new…” Dunbar, 94 U.S. at 199.
Thus, a person with ordinary skill in the art person would have known to
modify Robinson to include an independent go-between as taught by Ginter to
13
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013