Appeal No. 1996-0485 Page 13
Application No. 08/139,456
its teaching on YUV-formatted data during conversion to the
RGB format as claimed. The examiner erred by misconstruing
the scope of the suggestion. Neither the addition of Sanders
nor Cook cures the aforementioned defect of Admission in view
of Deacon. The examiner has not identified anything in these
references or the prior art as a whole that would have
suggested employing a look-up operation as part of converting
data from the YUV format to the RGB format.
For the foregoing reasons, the examiner failed to show
that the references teach or would have suggested the means
for adding noise of claims 1 and 8 and their dependent claims
2-7 and 9-15, respectively. He also failed to show that the
references teach or would have suggested the step of adding
noise of claim 16 and its dependent claims 17-21. In
addition, the examiner failed to show that the references
teach or would have suggested the look-up operation of claims
1, 8, and 16 and their dependent claims 2-7, 9-15, and 17-21,
respectively. Therefore, we find that the examiner’s
rejection does not amount to a prima facie case of
obviousness. Because the examiner has not established a prima
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007