Appeal No. 2001-1306 Page 23
Application No. 08/100,019
while the unexposed portion is exposed, as is routinely practiced
in photography art.
Likewise, the Examiner is recommended to make similar
determination with respect to Olson and determine whether “same
invention” is claimed, i.e., whether the subject matter of
Appellant’s claim 1 is anticipated (35 U.S.C. § 102) or rendered
obvious (35 U.S.C. § 103) by the subject matter of Olson’s claims
1, 18 or 19 and vice versa. We suggest that the Examiner pay
specific attention to col. 7, lines 24-29 and 43-51 of Olson in
which claim 1 recites:
directing actinic light through the first section of
the template and onto the photosensitive layer so as
to pre-expose a first portion thereof to form a first
latent image while simultaneously leaving a second
portion thereof unexposed;
packaging the film unit in an opaque film cassette having an
exposure aperture ... while the first portion of the
photosensitive layer containing the first latent image
is substantially completely covered by portions of the
wall defining the exposure aperture;
actuating a shutter of the camera ..., such scene light
being adapted to expose only the second portion of the
photosensitive layer of the film unit to provide a
second latent image while the first portion ... is
protected from further exposure by the wall of the film
cassette; and
processing the film unit so as to simultaneously develop the
first and second latent images. [Emphasis added.]
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007