Appeal No. 2001-2620
Application No. 09/110,613
The following references are relied on by the Examiner:
U.S. Patent
Hirata 5,781,899 Jul. 14, 1998
(filed Oct. 26, 1995)
European Published Patent Application
Hiroaki EP 0 713 186 A1 May 22, 1996
Claims 1-3, 5-9 and 11-14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Hirata.
Claims 4, 10 and 15-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Hirata in view of Hiroaki.
We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 9, mailed June 5,
2001) for the Examiner’s reasoning, and to the brief (Paper No.
8, filed March 28, 2001) and the reply brief (Paper No. 10, filed
August 10, 2001) for Appellant’s arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Appellant argues that Hirata processes an image to create
“zones” that define the shapes within the image (brief, page 4).
Referring to Figure 2 of Hirata, Appellant points out that each
image is partitioned into blocks (image B) and zones (image C)
wherein each block is further processed to identify the one color
that defines the block (id.). Appellant further argues that
Hirata’s shape-based comparison method does not include the
claimed comparison of proportions of similar colors within each
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007