Appeal No. 2006-2919 Page 14
Application No. 10/291,955
are not read into the claims. In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184, 26
USPQ2d 1057, 1059 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In the instant case, we find the
language of claim 1 broadly but reasonably reads on biometric data that is
stored anywhere, including on a bar code, as argued by the examiner.
Furthermore, we do not agree with appellants’ contention that neither
Gerety nor Roustaei teaches or suggests an imager capable of capturing
both biometric and bar code data [brief, page 9]. We note that Roustaei
explicitly discloses an imager 61 that can capture both a bar code and a
photograph image [col. 4, §§ 0041, 0044, see also fig. 8, step 83: “BAR
CODE OR PHOTOGRAPH”]. We interpret the examiner’s rejection as relying
upon the dual function of Roustaei’s imager as teaching a single imager that
can scan photograph images (including biometric data when combined with
Gerety), as well as bar codes. We note that imager 31 includes image
sensor 32 and a block diagram of imager 31 is illustrated in fig. 6 as imager
61 [Roustaei, col. 3, §§ 0038, 0040].
We do not find persuasive appellants’ contention that Roustaei’s
imager is incapable of capturing biometric images [reply brief, page 5]. In
particular, we note that a biometric image can be a photograph of a person’s
face, such as the facial recognition data disclosed on page 3 of appellants’
specification and also explicitly disclosed by Gerety at col. 13, line 39. We
note that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has determined that
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007