Ex Parte LOU et al - Page 5



          Appeal No. 2003-2038                                                        
          Application 09/288,833                                                      


                    generating a reproduction of said program                         
                    source based at least upon the decoding of                        
                    the data packets buffered in said second                          
                    receive buffer before said first buffering                        
                    delay has elapsed, and based at least upon                        
                    the decoding of the data packets buffered in                      
                    said first receive buffer after said first                        
                    buffering delay has elapsed.                                      
                                     References                                       
                    The references relied on by the Examiner are as                   
          follows:                                                                    
          Cellario et al. (Cellario)       6,108,626       Aug. 22, 2000              
          (filed May  14, 1998)                                                       
          Goyal et al. (Goyal)             6,345,125       Feb.  5, 2002              
          (filed Feb. 25, 1998)                                                       
          Adams                            0,695,094       Jan. 31, 1996              
          (European Patent Application)                                               
          Orchard et al. (Orchard), “Redundancy Rate-Distortion Analysis              
          of Multiple Description Coding Using Pairwise Correlating                   
          Transforms,” IEEE, 1997                                                     

                                 Rejections at Issue                                  
                    Claims 1, 3 through 7, 9 through 11, 13 through 17, 19            
          and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable           
          over Adams in view of Cellario.  Claims 2 and 12 stand rejected             
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Adams in view              
          of Cellario and Goyal.  Claims 8 and 18 stand rejected under                

                                          5                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007