Appeal No. 2002-0489
Application 08/831,731
setting start/stop positions which are meant to be set.
Essentially what is being claimed is a (possible) new use of an
old device, i.e., the use of the Philips decoder, with its
programmable horizontal sync pulse HS, as a burst gate signal
generator. New and unobvious uses of old devices must be claimed
as process claims. 35 U.S.C. § 100(b). Another claim
interpretation issue is that the claimed "external burst gate
signal" is merely a label and the nomenclature alone does not
distinguish over the horizontal sync output signal HS in Philips.
Assuming that the external burst gate signal limitations are
interpreted to be structural limitations, appellant has not shown
how the limitations define over HS shown in Fig. 19 of Philips.
Appellant's Fig. 9 is a copy of the curves in Fig. 19 of Philips
with the labels removed or changed, and shows the color burst
enveloped by the horizontal sync pulse HS in the same way as
Fig. 19. If appellant's Fig. 9 shows an appropriate simulated
burst gate signal, then so does Fig. 19 of Philips or, at least,
appellant has not explained why it does not. That the horizontal
sync output signal HS in Philips is not called a simulated
external burst gate signal is mere matter of labels or intended
use. Appellant does not explain why the HS signal shown in
Fig. 19 Philips cannot function as a burst gate signal, for
example, by pointing to claimed characteristics of the burst gate
signal not present in HS. Appellant does not explain why the
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007