Appeal 2007-1672
Application 09/966,540
claims clearly states that the wireless module is “configured to transmit
through a privacy system, the privacy system comprising a secure
mechanism for correlating an identifier of the electronic transaction device
with a user authorized to use the electronic transaction device.”
Accordingly, the claimed device interacts with the security system, it does
not include it.
We are satisfied that claim 7 sets out and circumscribes a particular
area with a reasonable degree of precision and particularity when read in
light of the application disclosure as it would be interpreted by one of
ordinary skill in the art.
E. CONCLUSION OF LAW
For the foregoing reason, we reverse the rejection of claims 7-13
under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13, 14, and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) over Buckley.
Appellant states that the claims stand or fall together, with claim 1
being representative (Appeal Br. 3). Claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A transaction device comprising:
a sensor module configured to receive a product identification for a
product through a product tag; and
a communication module configured to transmit the product
identification and a device identifier associated with the transaction
device to a product server through a privacy server to obtain product
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013