Appeal No. 2001-2620
Application No. 09/110,613
partition (brief, page 5). Additionally, Appellant questions the
Examiner’s characterization of red, green and blue (RGB) encoding
in Hirata as the claimed “determining a color distance between
similar colors” and “comparing the proportions of similar colors”
and argues that the claimed proportions of similar colors is not
the same as the proportions of red, green and blue in a color
(reply brief, pages 2 & 3).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner asserts
that the claimed proportion of similar colors in the partitions
is equivalent to the RGB proportions of similar colors in the two
zones of Hirata (answer, page 9). The Examiner further asserts
that the image comparison of Hirata is based on both color and
shape of the zones and includes a comparison of proportions of
similar colors as the proportions of red, green and blue in each
color (answer, pages 9 & 10). The Examiner adds that since any
color can be expressed or divided to RGB proportions, the color
value of each block may be expressed in terms of RGB proportions
(answer, page 10).
A rejection for anticipation under section 102 requires that
each and every limitation of the claimed invention be disclosed
in a single prior art reference. In re Paulsen, 30 F.3d 1475,
1478-79, 31 USPQ2d 1671, 1673 (Fed. Cir. 1994). See also Atlas
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007