Appeal No. 2000-0376
Application 08/753,236
Claims 10, 11, and 39 ) Dietrich, Bruns, Morrisen, and Mizutani
Claim 10 recites that the recorded information indicates the
type of paper on which the indicia was printed. Claim 39 recites
that the printing parameters include information about the
supplies that the printer used to record the indicia. The
Examiner finds that Morrison discloses marking paper using
special inks and Mizutani discloses a sensor that discriminates
between different types of paper (EA13). The Examiner concludes
that it would have been obvious to modify Dietrich and Bruns to
use the Morrisen inks for added security (EA13) and that it would
have been obvious to incorporate a Mizutani sensor in the
combination to detect the type of paper and convey the result in
the indicia (EA13). The Examiner concludes that it would have
been obvious to modify Dietrich in view of Morrison and Mizutani
to indicate the type of paper on which the indicia is printed
because it aids in preventing and detecting counterfeiting and it
increases the number of parameters that a counterfeiter would
have to manipulate to escape detection (EA14).
Appellant argues that the claims are not directed to
providing added security, but record information about the type
of paper to determine print quality (Br19). It is argued that
the print quality may be improved if one knows the printing
parameters and the type of paper used to record the indicia
(Br19).
- 22 -
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007