Appeal No. 94-2081
Application No. 07/809,984
T=0.5 will not yield “m bits per pixel . . . where m is
greater than one” as set forth in claims 1 and 20, or the
“plural quantizing thresholds” of claims 38 and 45.
The obviousness rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, 9 through
13, 16, 20, 23, 27 through 31, 38, 39, 45 through 47, 52 and
53 is reversed because Le Gall and Hirabayashi neither teach
nor would they have suggested the claimed invention.
The obviousness rejection of claims 3, 8, 19, 21, 26, 40,
41, 48 and 49 is reversed because El-Sherbini does not cure
the noted shortcomings in the teachings of Le Gall and
Hirabayashi. The obviousness rejection of claims 4, 8, 17,
22, 26, 34, 43 and 51 is reversed because Kawamura does not
cure the noted shortcomings in the teachings of Le Gall and
Hirabayashi. The obviousness rejection of claims 14, 15, 22
and 44 is reversed because Morris does not cure the noted
shortcomings in the teachings of Le Gall and Hirabayashi. The
obviousness rejection of claims 18, 37, 42 and 50 is reversed
because Wang does not cure the noted shortcomings in the
teachings of Le Gall and Hirabayashi.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007