Appeal No. 1999-0832 Page 9
Application No. 08/147,793
a) increasing intensity of the illumination
source which illuminates the object with polarized
light whereby intensity of brightest features of the
object near a level of the detector response
saturation point; and
b) reducing the intensity level of the darkest
features of the object to levels near the detector’s
minimum response level by adjusting a polarizer to
discriminate against the polarization state of the
source illumination,
From our review of Suzuki, we find no teaching or suggestion
of these features. While Suzuki discloses (col. 3, lines 57-
61) that if the polarizing plate is designed to permit the
maximum magnification (the longest focal-length), the source
of illumination light can effectively be utilized. Suzuki
does not disclose that the maximum quantity of light at the
maximum magnification is near a level of the detector response
saturation point. In addition, while Suzuki discloses
adjusting the polarizer which can reduce the intensity level,
we find no suggestion in Suzuki that the intensity levels of
the darkest features are at a level near the detector's
minimum response level. The examiner's unsupported assertion
(answer, page 8) that the method would have been obvious is
not a substitute for evidence, and does not establish the
factual basis necessary to support a rejection of the claim.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007