Appeal No. 2003-0583
Application No. 09/270,688
displaced relative to the light film. In the implementation of
the "contour measuring means" described earlier in the reference,
a movable chair is in combination with the cameras and CCD's.
Col. 3, ll. 52-67. However, the chair is movable so that the
person's face may be initially positioned with respect to the
cameras and CCD's. The face must be positioned within the
cameras' fields of view, so that the CPU may determine angles of
the contours from the acquired images. Col. 4, ll. 3-47. The
movement of the chair is not described as being part of any
scanning operation.
I also agree with the examiner that instant claim 13
contains functional limitations that fail to distinguish over
Yanagida. For example, it appears -- at least to the extent
necessary to shift the burden to appellants to show otherwise --
that the apparatus described by Yanagida is capable of scanning
and determining coordinates of an undersurface of a foot, thus
disclosing what claim 13 requires of the scanning station.
In the present anticipation analysis, it matters little that
Yanagida does not describe scanning an undersurface of a foot.
The law of anticipation does not require that a reference "teach"
what an applicant's disclosure teaches. Assuming that a
reference is properly "prior art," it is only necessary that the
1818
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007