Appeal No. 1997-0896
Application 08/141,610
discloses adding two further codes to indicate a maximum
string length of 0's or 1's. These codes are represented by
“M0" or “M1" (note the Specification at page 18, lines 25-34).
Although Appellant has not argued this aspect of the
invention, it is recited in independent claims 1, 17, 38 and
46. Noting claim 1 for example, this run length encoding
variation is recited as:
and string encoding means for encoding a
bit string code for said first and second
maximum string lengths....(emphasis added)
We have reviewed APA (including Delongne and Aono) and
Wilson, and found no teaching or suggestion of providing a
separate code to indicate a maximum string length. Although
Appellant has insisted that his run length encoding is
different,
Clearly, the prior art includes many
different encoding techniques. But, the
disclosure of one technique, such as in
Aono or in Delongne, does not render the
completely different encoding technique of
the instant invention obvious. (Brief-page
11.)
We have had to discover the difference ourselves. Since
Appellant has claimed an invention which is not taught or
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007