Appeal No. 1007-0016
Application No. 08/162,333
invention. We are in agreement with Appellant that even
assuming arguendo that the skilled artisan would be motivated
to provide for integration of the edge extracted signals in
Takemoto, the proposed combination would not result in the
invention as claimed. The language of Appellant’s claim 11
requires that the integrated output sharpness value from the
edge extracting circuitry be supplied to the parameter
calculating means from which a sharpening parameter is
calculated and outputted. In this regard, as illustrated in
Figure 1 of Takemoto, the output of the edge extracting block
S4 is not applied to the sharpness calculating block
identified as S6 by the Examiner. Therefore, even if an
integrator were connected to the output of the edge extractor
(block S4) in Takemoto, the resulting combination would not
meet the limitations of the claims.
Since, for the above reasons, it is our view that the
Examiner has not established a prima facie case of
obviousness, we do not sustain the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection
of independent claim 11 nor of claims 13-16 and 18-22
dependent thereon.
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007