Appeal No. 97-2706
Application No. 08/340,946
along the side of shifted element image 62. Thus, it is clear
from the quoted excerpt from appellant’s disclosure that the
disclosed and claimed “major axis” is through the lengthwise
extent of each of shifted element images 62, 63 and 64. The
rejection of claims 14 through 17 under the first paragraph of
35 U.S.C. § 112 is reversed because the examiner has not
presented well-founded reasons for rejecting the claims.
Turning to the 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claims 14
and 15, appellant argues (Brief, page 7) that:
The Examiner has argued that forming a gray
scale image is inherently described in Gonzales, but
even if this is so, it is only shown on page 47 of
Gonzales. The Examiner has not at all demonstrated
a connection between the alleged description of
forming a shifted image and the requirement of claim
14 that the shifted image be derived from a gray
scale image. Instead, any mention of a gray scale
image is in a different section of Gonzales.
Further, the Examiner has not provided any support
as to why the deriving of a shifted image from a
gray scale image must necessarily occur in the
mathematical operations described in Gonzales.
Again, claim 14 recites a step of comparing the
shifted image to the gray scale image. As discussed
above, there is no connection described in Gonzales
between any inherent gray scale image and a shifted
image of it. Further, page 111, lines 10-20, of
Gonzales does not identically describe a gray scale
image and does not inherently require that
correlation be performed on a gray scale image.
Therefore, the step of comparing an image to a gray
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007