Appeal No. 2006-1378
Application No. 09/845,852
The examiner has now indicated that claims 2 and 11-14 are allowed [answer, page 2].
Accordingly, this appeal is now directed to the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 3 and
10.
The disclosed invention pertains to an image scanner and a method for detecting
defects in such a scanner.
Representative claim 3 is reproduced as follows:
3. A method for detecting a defect in image data, comprising:
determining that intensity data, from a particular photosensor, in a particular line-
array of photosensors, in a photosensor assembly, is less than a predetermined
intensity threshold; and
determining that intensity data, for each photosensor, physically corresponding to
the particular photosensor, in all line-arrays in the photosensor assembly other than the
particular line-array of photosensors, is not less than the predetermined intensity
threshold.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Palcic et al. (Palcic) 6,026,174 Feb. 15, 2000
Claims 1 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as failing
to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which appellant regards
as the
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007