Appeal No. 95-5109
Application No. 08/063,665
The obviousness rejection of claims 4 and 5 is reversed
because even if Hiroshi discloses “a means to improve the
performance of an auto-focusing operation by inputting a video
signal so that start points of a blanking period and a video
image period are set equally to a prescribed level” (Answer,
pages 11 and 12), the combined teachings of Kondo and Hiroshi
would still not meet the limitations of independent claim 3
and dependent claims 4 and 5.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through
13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007