Appeal No. 2003-1611 Page 3
Application No. 09/243,794
a processor for generating a three dimensional information of a
portion of the target on where the reference light is projected.
Claims 22-24 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by U.S.
Patent No. 5,461,478 ("Sakakibara").
OPINION
Rather than reiterate the positions of the examiner or the appellants in toto, we
address the point of contention therebetween. The examiner asserts, "Sakakibara
does teach imaging apparatus (camera 4) for imaging the reference light on the target
via reflection of the mirror surface. Wherein mirror reflects light onto the target and
imaging apparatus images the reference light on the target. This is cited Col. 5
lines 60-61." (Examiner's Answer at 6.) The appellants argue, "the camera 4 does not
image reference light on a target via a reflection of a mirror' surface. . . ." (Reply Br.1
at 3.) In addressing the point of contention, the Board conducts a two-step analysis.
First, we construe the representative claim to determine its scope. Second, we
determine whether the construed claim is anticipated.
1The appellants admit, "the Board may properly review th[e] Reply Brief without
necessarily being familiar with the Brief for Appellant." (Reply Br. at 1.)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007