Appeal No. 2006-2919 Page 23
Application No. 10/291,955
page 24]. The examiner asserts that a facial image is one type of biometric
access authority information [id.]. The examiner notes that Houvener further
teaches using an ID to retrieve stored biometric data where, in one
embodiment, the stored biometric data can then be compared at the remote
site as taught at col. 6, lines 52-59 [id.]. The examiner notes that in another
embodiment, the stored biometric data is first compared at the server and
then sent to the portable device and displayed for a store clerk who is
located at the portable device to make comparison for verification, as taught
at col. 10, lines 43-47 [id.]. The examiner asserts that the processor that
renders both captured and stored biometric data is the processor for
comparing the extracted data of the second image to stored biometric data
for the person [id.].
In the reply brief, appellants assert that Houvener describes a system
in which various peripheral devices are utilized to accomplish specific
functions rather than a single portable device [reply brief, page 9].
Appellants assert that in Houvener’s system, biometric data is retrieved from
a remote database using a system user ID, which is not read by the bar
code reader (Houvener, col. 6, lines 52-59) [id.]. Appellants conclude that
Houvener’s biometric data is not located based on the data read from the
first image [id.]. Appellants further assert that Houvener does not teach nor
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007