Appeal No. 2004-0007 Page 7
Application No. 09/844,105
It is also not clear how the examiner is interpreting “an actual and an expected
reference fingerprint” as used in claim 1 and whether the recitation of the plurality of
read/write units requires anything more than a broad read/write capability. As noted
above, the claim language alluded to by the examiner as lacking in Yamaguchi with
regard to the read unit is not recited in claim 1, implying that the examiner may not have
fully come to grips with the scope of the recitation of the read/write units in claim 1.
Yamaguchi discloses a data authentication mechanism not discussed by either
the examiner or appellant which appears to be quite pertinent to the subject matter of
appellant’s claims. As explained in column 15, line 30, et seq., a key number is entered
with the fingerprint data in the key setting register of the storage device2 and the content
of the n-th byte of the registered fingerprint data is added to or subtracted from the key
number to produce a conversion key number which is inserted in the m-th byte of the
registered fingerprint data. At the time of checking fingerprints, the content of the n-th
byte is then subtracted from or added to the content of the m-th byte (the conversion
key number) to reconstruct the key number. The reconstructed key number is then
compared with the entered key number to ensure that the fingerprint data has not been
altered since the key number was entered. Inasmuch as the data in the bytes of the
fingerprint data are related in some fashion to the levels of charges trapped in the
memory cells of the data storage device, the conversion key number inserted in the
2 As explained in column 7, lines 6-11, the data storage device could be the storage unit 414, a
hard disk drive in the host computer or an IC card 431 or optical card.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007