Ex Parte CHEVANCE et al - Page 5




          Appeal No. 2000-2247                                                        
          Application 08/137,189                                                      

          The range is 16 positions in the horizontal and vertical                    
          directions (-8 to +7 pixels from the center of the block, col. 5,           
          lines 10-13, which includes 0 pixel displacement) for a total of            
            2                                                                         
          16  tests to find the best match in the prior frame odd field and           
            2                                                                         
          16  tests to find the best match in the prior frame even field              
          (col. 5, lines 13-16).  Because a block is 8x8 pixels, this range           
          compares a current block to blocks in the vicinity of the current           
          block in prior frame fields (as compared to the embodiment of               
          figure 3 which compares a block to a block at the same location             
          in the prior frame fields).  However, this embodiment also does             
          not compare a current block of the current frame to reconstructed           
          neighboring blocks of the current frame, as claimed.                        
               The Examiner relies on "the motion compensation circuit of             
          figure 8 as incorporated into the encoder of figure 4" (EA5).               
          The Examiner's reasoning is somewhat lengthy and convoluted, but            
          basically the Examiner finds that the frame memories contain                
          reconstructed current frames and interprets elements 134 and 136            
          in figure 8 to be memories that hold reconstructed current and              
          preceding frames (EA5-7).                                                   
               Appellants argue, inter alia: (1) there is no suggestion to            














Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007