Ex parte ALBAUGH et al. - Page 2




          Appeal No. 95-3380                                                          
          Application 08/109,572                                                      



                                 DECISION ON APPEAL                                   
               Appellants have appealed to the Board from the examiner’s              
          final rejection of claims 33 to 46, which are all the claims that           
          remain in the application.                                                  
               Representative claim 33 is reproduced below:                           
               33.  A method of displaying objects on a computer graphics             
          system having a display with at least one block of pixels, said             
          block including at least two pixels therein, comprising the steps           
          of:                                                                         
               displaying, by the pixels within said block, at least a                
          portion of a first object;                                                  
               storing a maximum depth value for the block of pixels                  
          displaying the first object;                                                
               computing a single depth value for a second object to be               
          displayed by at least one pixel in said block; and                          
               determining, in one comparison only between said maximum               
          depth value and said single depth value, whether all the pixels             
          in the block will continue to display the first object.                     
               The following reference is relied on by the examiner:                  
          Heckel                   4,697,178                Sep. 29, 1987             

               Claims 33 to 46 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as                
          being obvious over Heckel alone.                                            
               Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the             
          examiner, reference is made to the Brief and the Answer for the             
          respective details thereof.                                                 
                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007