Appeal No. 97-0178
Application 08/355,326
found the well known ultraviolet range, the infra-red range along with other known non-
visible coding schemes using other types of radiation. These types of radiation are
equivalent in the sense that they are not visible in the ordinary visible range of light. The
Examiner states that "[o]ne might be motivated to choose infrared instead of ultraviolet
because of the infra-red laser diodes common in scanners are readily available. One
might be motivated to choose infra-red in order to avoid interference from stray ultraviolet
light which may be emanating from other apparatus.” (See answer at page 10.)
Furthermore, appellant’s specification admits of the well known use of Helium-Neon
laser scanners which read in the infra-red range of light. (Specification at page 1.)
Appellant argues that Fisun “specifically require[s] UV.” The Examiner agrees, but
argues that the combination of the teachings rather than the individual teachings
would have motivated the skilled artisan to use the infra-red spectrum. (See answer at
pages 12-13.) We agree with the Examiner as discussed above.
Appellant argues that the Examiner has not set forth a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to the rejection of claim 11. (See reply brief at pages 3-4.) We
disagree with appellant and find that the Examiner has set forth a prima facie case of
11
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007