Appeal No. 96-2379
Application 07/837,240
§ 1.192(c)(8)(iv) requires the appellant to explain why the issue
at hand would render the claimed subject matter nonobvious to one
with ordinary skill in the art. The appellant has not done that.
With regard to claim 16, which depends from claim 15, the
appellant argues merely the distinctions based on features
recited in claims 2 and 15. Accordingly, this claim will fall
together with claims 2 and 15.
The rejection of claims 10-11 and 20
We do not sustain the rejection of claims 10-11 and 20.
Claim 10 depends from claim 1 and further recites that the
dithering value is dependent on the location information of the
next input data. Claim 11 depends from claim 1 and further
recites that the dithering value is dependent on the location
information of the input data and on the location information of
the next input data. Claim 20 depends from claim 2 and recites
that the step of adding a dithering value includes providing a
dithering value which is dependent on the location information of
the next input data. Thus, all of claims 10, 11 and 20 require
that the dithering value is dependent on the location information
of the next input data.
The examiner specifically acknowledges (answer at 5) that
Comins does not disclose that the dithering value is dependent on
12
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007