Appeal No. 96-2573
Application No. 08/331,168
[w]hile...Chandler...does not specifically and
expressly disclose sensing and generating a height
signal representative of a scanning distance between
said optical target and said optical scanning
device, such signals are readily picked-up and
generated by the sensor utilized by...Chandler...
Then, at the top of page 9 of the answer, the examiner
concludes that it would have been obvious
...to provide for the specific sensing and
generating a height signal representative of a
scanning distance between said optical target and
said optical scanning device in...Chandler...
because this “is a routine design choice...” We are unclear
as to what the examiner is driving at here since it is clear
in Chandler that the height signal is, indeed, representative
of the distance between the optical target and the optical
scanning device (column 22, lines 22-37). No “design choice”
would be needed since, in our view, such generation of a
height signal is taught by Chandler. However, this height
signal appears to be used only to adjust the focus of the
camera. While this may also be one of appellants’ uses of the
height signal, as claimed, the height signal is also used to
adjust a second resampling frequency which is, in turn, used
to generate a frequency shifted optical target signal which is
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007