Appeal No. 96-3087
Application 08/059,060
correcting an input image in accordance with the input viewing
environment and the output viewing environment. Rather,
Carlucci performs the correction of an input image using a
convential calibration procedure whereby the input image is
calibrated within itself using a predetermined calibrating
scheme, not in accordance with the variable chromatic
difference between the input environment and the output
viewing environment. The addition of Rolleston's teaching3
does not cure this deficiency.
Thus the collective teachings of Carlucci and Rolleston
do not support the rejection of claim 41 proposed by the
examiner. The rejection of claim 41 is reversed.
The other independent claims, claims 24, 30, 37, 43, 45
and 46, all contain the features discussed above in regard to
claim 41. Therefore, the rejections of these claims under 35
3The appellants argue the propriety of combining Carlucci and Rolleston as a
side issue. However, we are of the view that this issue is moot to our decision.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007