Appeal No. 96-2304 Page 5
Application No. 08/136,252
length coding. However, there is no selection of “one of a
plurality of variable length coding tables,” as required by the
claims since there is no suggestion in Chen of a “plurality of
variable length coding tables.” Moreover, to the extent that
there is any selection of one of a plurality of variable length
coding tables by Chen, we find no such selection being a
“function of said coding mode,” as claimed.
We have reviewed the examiner’s comments regarding the
equating of Chen’s “code book” to appellants’ “coding table” but
we are unconvinced of either anticipation or obviousness of the
instant claimed subject matter, based on the evidence provided
by Chen. We do not find the claimed relationship between the
selection of a variable length coding table, or an assignment of
VLC code words [column 8 in Chen] and the encoding mode, in Chen
and we are unconvinced that there is any suggestion in the prior
art to provide for such a relationship.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 17 through 25
under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) and claims 26 through 31 under 35 U.S.C.
103 is reversed.
REVERSED
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007