Appeal No. 2004-2185
Application 08/855,245
have been suggested as the means of implementing bandwidth
control etc. according to the teachings of Bolot where Chaddha
already teaches or suggests these capabilities anyway. Both
Chaddha and Bolot indicate that the server informs the respective
clients of the content in a broad manner as recited in claim 6 on
appeal of the multimedia data to be sent to the respective
clients. Chaddha makes clear beginning at column 1 in its prior
art statement that both temporal and spatial domains are utilized
as recited in dependent claims 7 and 8. Finally, the Laplacian
algorithm recited in dependent claim 9 is discussed even in the
abstract of Chaddha.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner
rejecting claims 1-23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007