Appeal No. 1997-1240
Application 07/881,753
ordinary skill in the art because separating the same
apparatus into two or three different components would not
provide any significant functional or patentable difference.
Appellants respond to the above Examiner's argument
in the supplemental reply brief on page 4 stating that the
problem of the Examiner's position is that the Examiner has
never established that double scanning speed conversion
circuit 1103 in figure 11 of Katsumata in fact provides the
scanning line conversion function of the high definition
processing means recited in claims 1, 18 and 20, and the
scanning line conversion means recited in claim 22.
Appellants argue on page 6 of the
supplemental reply brief that in figure 11 of Katsumata, IDTV
processor 1101, double scanning speed conversion circuit 1103,
and aspect ratio conversion circuit 108 convert the NTSC
signal
into a double rate signal which is an ED signal having 525
11
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007