Appeal No. 2004-0227
Application 09/140,151
support” (col. 2, lines 40-49). The surface pattern may be a
pattern of dielectric or magnetic lines (col. 3, lines 45-47).
The examiner argues that “Verschuur differs from the claims
by not specifically describing storing of the measured
information” (answer, page 3). Instead, to read encoded
information Verschuur compares variations in capacitance
associated with ink patterns to stored information about similar
patterns (col. 3, lines 1-5).
Verschuur also differs from the appellants’ claimed
invention by not being directed toward providing security
information. Although, as argued by the examiner (answer,
page 6), Verschuur states that information on the contents of the
envelopes can be verified, this statement in the context of the
contents being orders, replies or records (col. 8, lines 10-12).
Verschuur does not indicate that the information can be security
information.
The examiner argues that it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to include a random distribution of
dielectric components in the contents of Verschuur’s envelopes
and to compare measured changes in an electric field to
previously stored information to provide security against forgery
(answer, pages 4-5).
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007