Appeal No. 1997-1240
Application 07/881,753
and the scanning frequency of a MUSE
signal.
We appreciate that the Examiner's position is that
Katsumata teaches in figure 11 a box labelled DOUBLE SCAN
SPEED CONVERSION, 1103, which inherently performs the function
of Appellants' claimed high definition processing means for
applying a scanning line conversion processing to convert the
double rate signal into a signal having the same format as
that of a high definition television signal and a same field
frequency as that of a standard television signal.
Our reviewing court states that in order "[t]o
establish inherency, the extrinsic evidence 'must make clear
that the missing descriptive matter is necessarily present in
the thing described in the reference, and that it would be so
recognized by persons of ordinary skill.'" In re Robertson,
169 F.3d 743, 745, 49 USPQ2d 1949, 1950-51 (Fed. Cir. 1999)
citing Continental Can Co. v. Monsanto Co., 948 F.3d 1264,
13
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007