Appeal 2007-1672
Application 09/966,540
C. PRINCIPLE OF LAW
“A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in
the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior
art reference.” Verdegaal Bros., Inc. v. Union Oil Co., 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2
USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
D. ANALYSIS
The issue is whether Buckley teaches the claimed communication
module, i.e.,
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
information from the product server without providing an
identification of a user of the transaction device.
(Claim 1). Appellant did not argue that Buckley teaches a communication
module configured to transmit product identification and a device identifier
associated with the transaction device to a product server through a privacy
server to obtain product information from the product server. Rather,
Appellant argued that Buckley’s module does not teach a communication
module configured to transmit the information “without providing an
identification of a user of the transaction device.”
There is no dispute that Buckley does not disclose a communication
module configured to provide the identification of a user. In fact, there is no
mention of providing the identification of a user anywhere in the reference.
On the other hand, Buckley does not expressly teach a communication
module configured not to provide the identification of a user. We agree with
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013