Appeal No. 96-1480
Application No. 08/179,779
defining a data code support having a surface with at
least one predetermined unit of surface area delineated
thereon, said at least one predetermined unit of surface area
being divided into four equal regions having similar
dimensions, each region of said four regions constituting a
unitary recording area and portraying a different binary
notation commencing with the lowest order of binary notation
and thereafter successive binary notations, said lowest order
of binary notations being depicted by a unitary recording area
or region being shaded to represent the lowest order of a
binary notation value of a group of selected binary notation
values, the remainder of said regions selectively being shaded
to depict any one of a predetermined number of selected
notation values;
placing an apparatus for reading a data code on said
defined data code support adjacent said defined data code
support;
directing light signals onto said data code support from
a light source of said apparatus for reading the data code of
said data code support;
receiving the reflected or transmitted light signals from
said light source directed onto said data code support by said
apparatus for reading the data code;
simultaneous with said receiving step, corresponding said
light signals received by said apparatus for each shaded
region being read by said apparatus as 1, and for each region
being not so shaded as 0, such that said data code on said
data code support is read directly into digital signals.
In response to the examiner’s statement (final rejection,
page 2) that “Claims 6-28 are rejected as set forth
previously,” appellant states (Brief, page 2) that “it is not
clear how new Claims 23 through 28 are rejected ‘as set forth
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007