Appeal No. 1998-3062
Application 08/425,319
precision. In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475, 1479, 31 USPQ2d 1671,
1674 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
Upon our reading of Appellant's claims, we agree with the
Appellant that the claims require using a field of induction
technique to segment characters. Furthermore, we note that
the term "field of induction", is defined in the
specification. In particular Appellant defines the term
"field of induction" on page 12 by equation (1). In
particular, Appellant states that the field of induction is
calculated using equation (1) which determines the intensity
MP of the field of induction on the
retina at point P. Appellant further points out that in
equation (1), only the sum of scanning of portions directly
irradiated by light emitted from point P is calculated. Thus
the term "field of induction" has a particular meaning as
defined by Appellant's specification.
Turning to Kubota, we agree with Appellant that Kubota is
not directed to segmenting a desired character from an array
of characters. In particular, on page 1, Kubota states that
the character has already been segmented and their method is
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007