Appeal No. 97-3749
Application 08/360,069
We also find no basis to use Hirai’s designation of recording medium with Yip’s
gray scale computer. Yip would require that different lookup tables be prepared for each
different type of hard copy product to be generated. Thus, the lookup tables in Yip already
include information related to the nature of the hard copy product, and therefore, Hirai’s
medium designation would serve no purpose in Yip. Hirai would also have suggested
modifying the Yip data at the film processing stage as opposed to the image data stage
as recited in the claimed invention. Since the combination of Yip and Hirai do not teach all
the recitations of independent claim 1, we do not sustain the examiner’s new ground of
rejection of claims 1-3.
We now consider the examiner’s new ground of rejection of claims 4-8 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the teachings of Yip in view of Hirai and further in
view of Jamzadeh. These claims are all dependent claims which depend from
independent claim 1. Since Jamzadeh does not overcome the deficiencies in the
combined teachings of Yip and Hirai, dependent claims 4-8 are patentable over the
applied art of record at least for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. We
also agree with appellant that Jamzadeh does not suggest any of the modifications recited
in claims 6-8. Therefore, we do not sustain the examiner’s new ground of rejection of
claims 4-8.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007