Ex Parte Grandine et al - Page 5


             Appeal No. 2006-2963                                                                                     
             Application No. 10/309,969                                                                               

             tangent is actually counter to Peters’ teachings.  Rather, Peters derives coefficient C                  
             from a sequence of data points [Reply Brief, pages 2, 3, and 6].  Appellants add that                    
             even if points b0 - b4  correspond to Bezier coefficients P, B0, C, B1, P+ described in                  
             Peters, for Peters to anticipate the claim, Peters must determine the Bezier coefficients                
             P, B0, C, B1, P+ based upon a pair of positions, directions, and curvatures.  Appellants                 
             contend that Peters, however, discloses just the opposite – determining tangent based                    
             upon Bezier coefficient C [Reply Brief, page 5].                                                         
                The Examiner also argues that the independent claims do not require providing                         
             directions and curvature data as original fixed inputs, but rather merely recite that the                
             pair of positions “includes” associated directions and curvatures.  Therefore, the claims                
             do not preclude directions and curvatures that are functions of positional data [Answer,                 
             pages 16 and 17].  Appellants respond that the claimed invention requires including                      
             directions and curvatures as part of the provided positions rather than merely                           
             associating the provided pair of positions, directions, and curvatures [Reply Brief, page                
             5].                                                                                                      
                    We will sustain the Examiner’s rejection of independent claims 1, 11, and 21.  At                 
             the outset, we note that any point on a curve inherently has an associated direction (i.e.,              
             established by the tangent at that point1) and curvature.  Therefore, the pair of                        


                                                                                                                     
             1 Although Peters discloses defining tangent t in terms of the pair C and C- as appellants indicate, Peters
             nevertheless teaches that such an approach is “somewhat less flexible than the actual prescription of    
             tangents at each data point” [Peters, page 238; emphasis added].  Such a statement not only suggests     
             that each point on a curve inherently has an associated tangent, but prescribing such tangents at each   
             data point is actually more flexible than defining them in terms of the pair C and C-.                   
                                                          5                                                           





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007