Ex parte MAURINUS et al. - Page 5

          Appeal No. 1998-0660                                                        
          Application No. 08/584,501                                                  

          1239 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (citing W. L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v.                 
          Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1548, 220 USPQ 303, 309 (Fed.                 
          Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984)).                             
               With respect to claim 1, the Examiner reasons that APA                 
          teaches the claimed system with “selectivity” in performing                 
          these operations being inherent (answer-page 3).  The Examiner              
          explains that the inherent “selectivity” exists inasmuch as                 
          the customer selects whether or not to enter a ride equipped                
          with the described photographing system; or alternatively, to               
          provide the customer with the option of whether or not to be                
          photographed in order to avoid objections by customers who                  
          choose not to be photographed would be an expedient obvious to              
          one of ordinary skill in the art (answer-page 4).                           
               The Examiner acknowledges that APA does not provide a                  
          networking element, in which several capture stations feed                  
          images to one output station and hardware supporting this                   
          operation.  The Examiner cites Maeda for this teaching in that              
          Maeda collects and stores digital images using a network                    
          connecting digital image sources to a central controller and                
          output device (answer-pages 3 and 4).                                       


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007