Appeal No. 95-4361
Application 08/043,320
whose output is the desired R, G and B data (see Figure 1). The
appellants are correct in stating that the control logic unit 40
is used for timing and controlling the access to decoder 18 and
the lookup table 28 (Br. At 9). The logic 40 does not constitute
a second stage conversion section taking as inputs the output
from the lookup table 28 and another component from the source.
Claims 9-14 all depend either directly or indirectly from
claim 8. Claims 9-11 and 13-14 are rejected over the combination
of Rumball and Lucas. Claim 12 is rejected over the combination
of Rumball, Lucas and Ishii. As already explained above, neither
Lucas nor Ishii suggests the two-stage conversion process claimed
by the appellants. Therefore, neither makes up for the
deficiencies of Rumball.
For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the rejection of
claims 1-14.
Conclusion
The rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ishii is reversed.
The rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ishii and Lucas is reversed.
The rejection of claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007