Appeal No. 96-1624 Page 3
Application 07/913,615
means for storing a result of the processing
performed by said processing means together with said
identification codes.
Claim 12 is written in means-plus-function format. (Paper 1
at 35.) In particular, Appellants rely on each terminal's "means
for instructing processing of the image data at a main body"
(Paper 18 (Brief) at 11; cf. claim 12), a means-plus-function
limitation, to distinguish Ohkubo. Appellants argue that Ohkubo
has "no corresponding structure."
Appellants' terminals instruct processing at the main body
by, at a minimum, sending a telephone number to the main body if
the image data is to be transmitted instead of simply being
copied. (Paper 1 at 12; Fig. 5a.) The structure corresponding
to "means for instructing processing of said read image at said
main body" includes, at a minimum, an operation panel 34 with a
ten-key section and a random-access memory ("RAM") 37. The
scanner operator enters the telephone number using the operation
panel 37. The entered telephone number is stored in RAM 37 until
it is sent to the main body. This entered telephone number is
distinct from the identification code. (Paper 1 at 12; Fig. 5a.)
This distinction is maintained in claim 12 where instruction data
and the sending code are separately described. Claim 12 cannot
be reasonably construed to include the identification code as
part of the instruction data.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007