Appeal No. 96-2497 Page 5
Application No. 08/314,788
corresponding, respectively, to a chin and a crown of a head of
a facial image. The examiner cites the zoom feature of Thayer
(buttons 134 and 136 of Figure 2) as corresponding to the
claimed “adjusting device.”
Appellants argue that the grids of Thayer do not in any
way serve to detect the size of the subject’s facial image or
correspond to portions of the facial image but merely aid in
positioning the image. We disagree. While we clearly
understand the differences between the instant disclosed
invention and that disclosed by Thayer, as broadly claimed in
the language of claim 1, we agree with the examiner that Thayer
teaches a “detection device” and an “adjusting device.”
It is clear that in Thayer the subject has wide discretion
as to how the image will be posed within each of the grids.
Thus, a subject may very well choose to align his/her chin with
the bottom line in, say, the bottom right grid of Figure 12 and
the subject’s face is within that grid. Thus, it can
reasonably be said that the grid line is a “detection device”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007