Appeal No. 95-3408
Application 08/003,448
The discussion in the first half of column 3 of Barbier indicates
as well that it takes two successive scans or two successive
image scans to properly display the information. We note also
that col. 2, lines 39 through 43 indicate from the brief
description of Figs. 3 and 4 that it takes two successive image
scans to
alternately extract from the memory information relating to
successive pixels of an image to be displayed.
Thus, in the context of the language of claims 19 and 21 on
appeal it would appear that Barbier’s teachings fail to fulfill
the limitation that at least two kinds of divided data are
supplied for one row during one horizontal scanning of one frame.
In Barbier, there are two successive image scans whereas the
claims on appeal require at least two data kinds per single image
scan.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007