Appeal No. 2002-1375
Application No. 09/353,948
BACKGROUND
Appellants’ invention relates to a video conferencing apparatus and method
therefor. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary
claim 1, which is reproduced below.
1. A videoconferencing, [sic, video conferencing] method comprising
the steps of :
determining changes in position of a predetermined set of
reference points on one or more participants;
sending said changes in position to one or more receivers; and
in said one or more receivers, animating one or more linear frame
representations corresponding to said one or more participants in
response to said changes in position.
The prior art reference of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims is:
Nitta 5,347,306 Sep. 13, 1994
Claims 1-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Nitta.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the examiner's
answer (Paper No. 11, mailed Jul. 30, 2001) for the examiner's reasoning in support of
the rejections, and to appellants’ brief (Paper No. 10, filed May 17, 2001) and reply brief
(Paper No. 12, filed Oct. 5, 2001) for appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007