Appeal No. 2002-1632
Application No. 08/941,785
The Examiner relies on the following reference in rejecting
the claims:
Fujii et al (Fujii) 5,815,636 Sep. 29, 1998
(effective filing date March 28, 1994)
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-15, 22-26, 33-37, 39-46, 48-55, 57-62, 64-
69, 71, 72 and 74 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
being anticipated by Fujii.
Claims 16-21 and 27-32 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fujii.
Rather than reiterate the viewpoints of the Examiner and
Appellant, we make reference to the answer (Paper No. 28, mailed
December 7, 2001) for the Examiner’s complete reasoning in
support of the rejection, and to the appeal brief (Paper No. 27,
filed November 27, 2001)2 and the reply brief (Paper No. 29,
filed February 25, 2002) for Appellant’s arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of the claims,
Appellant points out that the claims are directed to coding data
and data compression and differ from the prior art that relates
to error correction (brief, page 8 and reply brief, page 3).
2 The revised appeal brief was refiled in response to a letter from the
Examiner (Paper No. 26, mailed October 22, 2001), indicating that the earlier
filed appeal brief (Paper no. 25, filed September 14, 2001) was defective.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007