Appeal No. 97-2709
Application No. 08/380,315
the low frequency and the high frequency components that are
output by the decimator 105. The interpolated outputs on line
145 input a predictor 147 that in turn outputs a predicted PEL
value on line 102 for comparison with incoming PELs 101 in the
next video frame.
Even if we assume for the sake of argument that it would
have been obvious to combine the filter, decimator and
interpolator teachings of Gharavi with the low frequency
separation teachings of Citta '100 (paper number 25, pages 3
and 4), we still agree with the appellant (Brief, page 12)
that “Citta ('100), like Gharavi, neither teaches nor suggests
decimating and/or interpolating only the low band frequencies
as required by independent claims 11-16.” For this reason,
the obviousness rejection of claims 11 through 17 based upon
the combined teachings of Citta '100 and Gharavi is reversed.
In the alternative obviousness rejection of claims 11
through 17, the examiner notes (paper number 25, page 4) that
Kretzmer divides an incoming video signal into a high
frequency analog component 17, and a low frequency analog
component 15. The examiner acknowledges (paper number 25,
pages 4 and 5) that Kretzmer “does not disclose the idea of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007