Appeal No. 95-1217
Application 08/039,674
The Examiner provided a number of reasons for rejecting
claims 1 through 13 and claims 15 through 20 as non-enabling.
The first reason was that the drawings are missing several
elements that are referred to in the specification. Page 8 of
the specification refers to a background "37" of the image,
but item 37 is not shown in Figure 2. The specification
defines the background of the image as the portion which does
not contain objects. The Examiner has failed to provide any
explanation as to why a person of ordinary skill in the art
would be unable to make and use the claimed invention due to
the Appellants’ failure to label background 37 in Figure 2.
The rejection is therefore reversed.
Similarly, the specification refers to edge trace
operations (57, 73, 81, 99, 113, and 137) as steps in certain
of the
analysis chains that are described. It also refers to "second
shadow subtract operation 127" as a step in one of the
analysis chains that is described. These items are not
labeled in the block diagram of the image analysis subroutine
shown in Figure 3. The Examiner has failed to provide any
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007