Ex Parte Hanes - Page 2


                Appeal 2007-1406                                                                             
                Application 09/910,970                                                                       
                                            THE INVENTION                                                    
                      The disclosed invention relates in general to video processing systems                 
                and, more specifically, to a system and method for detecting the border of                   
                recorded video data (Specification 1).                                                       
                      Independent claim 1 is illustrative:                                                   
                      1.           A method for detecting the border of recorded video data,                 
                            comprising:                                                                      
                                   analyzing a plurality of video frames, the plurality of                   
                            video frames comprising recorded data content and unrecorded                     
                            data content; and                                                                
                                   identifying at least one frame of the unrecorded data                     
                            content as a border of the recorded data content.                                
                                            THE REFERENCES                                                   
                Nafeh                          US 5,343,251             Aug 30, 1994                        
                Dettmer                        US 5,812,732             Sep. 22, 1998                       

                                            THE REJECTIONS                                                   
                      Claims 1-7, 9-13, 15-19, 22-29, and 31-35 stand rejected under 35                      
                U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Dettmer.                                             
                      Claims 8, 14, 20, and 30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                    
                being unpatentable over the teachings of Dettmer in view of Nafeh.                           


                                                                                                             
                claims 36-40 in the After Final Amendment (received April 30, 2004) which                    
                the Examiner entered on appeal (see Advisory Action mailed May 11, 2004).                    
                Therefore, the appeal of claims 1-20 and 22-35 is before us.                                 

                                                     2                                                       

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013