Appeal No. 1998-0624
Application No. 08/373,118
Initially the Examiner’s rejection indicated that
scanning was accomplished by Hanson’s scanner 15 (answer-page
3). Now, in response to Applicant’s argument, the Examiner
contends, “the created graphic image (i.e., a check) from
controller 42 is inputted into RIP 62 in which certain page
formats stored in memory 61 are used (col. 5, lines 38-47).”
(Answer-page 8.)
Again, we are not convinced by the Examiner regardless of
whether 15 is considered to be the scanner, or the new
contention that 62 is now considered to be the scanner. In
both renditions of the Examiner’s explanation of scanning, we
see no mention of the scanning being done using an OCR program
as claimed. We also note that the Examiner considered 62 to
be the computer for purposes of inputting an original graphic
image supra. Although the Examiner points to Blaylock for the
use of OCR, Blaylock’s statement “But the invention has equal
application with CMC7 or OCR applications,” is too vague to
suggest how OCR might be used in Hanson.
The fact that the Examiner changes and adapts the
application of the cited art, based upon Appellant’s
-7-7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007