Appeal No. 1997-1203
Application 08/432,786
We agree with the Examiner that Hatori, in Figure 6A,
does show the subtraction means 205 wherein signal S(203) is
being subtracted from the intra-frame difference signal
S(202). Furthermore, we concur with the Examiner that the
signal S(203) contains a low frequency component, even though
it may contain components of other frequencies. We also note
that the claim does not restrict the signal being subtracted
to one having only a low frequency component. Appellant’s
arguments regarding the “average of frequency components”
[brief, page 6] and 'inherently including a low frequency
component' [id] are not convincing and they do not overcome
the Examiner’s rejection. Thus, we sustain the anticipation
rejection of claim 7 over Hatori.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007