Appeal No. 1997-0401
Application 08/305,262
fails to fairly teach or suggest that the random noise used to
produce dithered images changes over time. Thus, we are also
in agreement with appellant (Brief, page 6) that Keith fails
to teach or suggest that different noise values be applied to
pixels in subsequent frames as required by representative
claim 1 on appeal.
We agree with appellant that "Keith expressly discloses
generating a single set of dithering matrices (one for each of
the U and V components)" (Brief, page 6), as opposed to using
differing dithering matrices over time as in the claims on
appeal. In Keith, each component is processed using the same
dithering matrix over and over. There is no disclosure of
using different matrices over time for a group of pixels in an
image. Our review of Keith reveals that "[t]his processing is
performed for each (4X4) subimage of each video image in the
sequence of video images" (Keith, column 4, lines 16 to
19)(emphasis added). Therefore, we cannot agree with the
examiner (Answer, pages 3 to 4) that one of ordinary skill in
the art looking at Keith (especially column 2, lines 49 to 55
as noted by the examiner) would have been motivated to use
differing dithering matrices over time in order to time-
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007