Appeal No. 1998-0618
Application 08/288,194
claimed invention is the 10E/40E angular interval aspect, and
that this aspect is recited in all independent claims (brief-
page 15). We note that the Examiner acknowledges Kado does
not mention image direction or angular interval aspect.
Appellants also argue that Rothfjell does not teach or suggest
the claimed 10E/40E angular interval aspect, that Rothfjell’s
0E, 45E and 90E teaches away from Appellants’ 10E/40E angular
aspect, and that the Examiner has used improper hindsight to
revise Rothfjell. (Brief-pages 15 and 16.)
We agree with Appellants. At first blush, the
Examiner’s position seems logical. The Examiner notes that
Rothfjell teaches any number of images can be captured, “from
one on up”, and that identification becomes more accurate with
an increased number of images. If the number of images were
increased, the logical result would be reduced angles. As we
note, this would reduce Rothfjell’s 45E angle to something
less, easily within Appellants’ claimed 40E. (Answer-page 7.)
However, upon closer inspection, this logic does not
hold water. First, neither Rothfjell nor Kado states that
7-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007