Appeal No. 96-0649
Application 08/191,234
We agree with the basic position set forth by the
examiner in which the examiner clearly shows that Gove is not
concerned with the details of camera motion sensing but does
indicate clearly that camera motion is a factor to be
determined in scene change determinations as set forth in
Gove’s own title. The details of camera induced motion
sensing are provided by Miyatake. The focus of Gove’s
teachings is upon scene change detection systems in which the
scene changes within the video images per se. Appellant’s
additional assertion at the top of page 7 of the brief that
Gove does not show or suggest the use of cumulative values of
camera motion for any purpose whatsoever is consistent with
the examiner’s position of the statement in the rejection and
analysis in the answer, since the examiner relies upon
Miyatake and not Gove for the teaching value of cumulative
determinations for any factors affecting camera motion.
Finally, appellant asserts at page 7 of the brief:
In regard to the ’034 reference, this reference
simply discloses one example of a method for
determining motion parameters that may be used by
the present invention. In fact, Appellant discloses
on page 17, line 21 - page 18, line 17 a number of
other similar methods that may be used. Appellant
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007