Appeal No. 96-4074
Application 08/387,669
Appellant argues on page 7 of the brief that Appellant's claims are distinguished over Watanabe
in view of Matsui and Specht. Appellant argues that the Appellant's invention addresses the problem of
finding the center of symmetry of a gray scale, rather than using the edge locations in the analysis as
taught in the prior art. Appellant further argues that Watanabe, Matsui and Specht do not teach that a
physical image is scanned to produce an array of digital values, that the array is applied to a
predetermined score calculation in which a score is calculated for each set of candidate center locations
and that the center is determined by the candidate having the highest score.
On pages 4 and 5 of the answer, the Examiner admits that Watanabe fails to teach the
Appellant's claimed steps of calculating a score at each of a set of candidate center locations,
determining which one of the set of candidate center locations has the highest score and selecting the
center of the approximately circular pattern, the center location determined as having the highest score
as recited in Appellant's claim 1. The Examiner then states that Matsui teaches in column 3, line 61,
and column 4, line 10, how to calculate the center of gravity based on gray level. The Examiner
concludes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to calculate Matsui's center
of gravity for Watanabe's approximate circle. On pages 5 and 6 of the answer, the Examiner then
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007