Appeal No. 2003-0583
Application No. 09/270,688
BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judge, concurring.
While I concur with the results reached by my colleagues, I
respectfully disagree with the finding that Yanagida fails to
disclose a movable laser scanning unit, as required by instant
claim 13. Also, with regard to requirements of the same claim, I
respectfully disagree with the majority's reasoning to the extent
that the decision may rest on the finding that Yanagida fails to
teach scanning the undersurface of a person's foot.
For the teaching of the movable laser scanning unit, the
examiner relies on material at column 5 of the reference, which
discloses (col. 5, ll. 45-65) that the apparatus making up the
three-dimensional "contour measuring means" is not limited to the
combination of cameras and CCD's described earlier in the
reference. Yanagida discloses, in the column five section, that
a person's face is scanned by a laser light beam in the form of a
"light film," with the three-dimensional configuration of the
person's face measured by "displacing the light film relative to
the person's face."
In my opinion, Yanagida provides substantial support for the
examiner's finding that the reference discloses a movable laser
scanning unit. Yanagida describes the light film being displaced
relative to the person's face, not the person's face being
1717
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007