Appeal No.1996-1411
Application No. 08/237,393
connects a foot to a leg. Thus, the linking principle is
clearly present in Haney when assembling the animated image.
When Haney is modified to operate in three dimensions, we
agree with the examiner that the final animated three-
dimensional character would be assembled by linking the
prestored three-dimensional drawings section by section.
Therefore, we sustain the rejection of claims 13 and 17.
With respect to dependent claims 14 and 18, appellant
argues that the collective prior art does not suggest the
graphic movement potential [brief, pages 21-22]. We agree
with the examiner that the prestored images in Haney based on
different
stances and positions suggests the storage of a graphic
movement potential. The various stances and positions in
three dimensions would relate to the universe of movements
that an object could make in three-dimensional space. We
agree with the
examiner that this would constitute a graphic movement
potential as claimed. Therefore, we sustain the rejection of
claims 14 and 18.
In summary, we have sustained the examiner’s rejection
of claims 11-18 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Therefore, the
16
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007