Appeal No. 96-0113
Application 07/848,779
We disagree with the examiner that claim 18 contains no
method steps. It should be noted that the appellant need not use
words the examiner would prefer to use, or a claim format with
which the examiner is more use to seeing or comfortable with.
Claim 18 is reproduced below:
18. A method for halftoning an image by modularly
addressing an ensemble of two-dimensional binary
patterns, each pattern corresponding to one density
level of a digital image signal to select bits to form
a halftone image, the ensemble of halftone patterns
being correlated and having minimum visual modulation,
the ensemble of patterns being generated simultaneously
by minimizing an ensemble cost function.
In our view, claim 18 includes at least the following steps,
written in alternative form:
1. modularly addressing an assemble of two-dimensional
binary patterns;
2. correlating the ensemble of halftone patterns;
3. generating the ensemble of patterns simultaneously.
Each of the foregoing features is necessary before claim 18
can be said to be met or anticipated by any prior art reference.
There are many ways to draft a method claim, including many ways
to set forth the method steps required. We know of no authority
which requires an applicant to begin each recital of a method
step by the "ing" form of a verb.
-8-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007