Appeal No. 1998-0669 Page 10
Application No. 08/507,194
Claims 13 and 14 each specify in pertinent part the
following limitations: “inputting an image of the document
including a plurality of columns; recognizing, using image
processing, empty space next to one of said columns ....”
Similarly, claims 28 and 29 each specify in pertinent part the
following limitations: “apparatus for processing an image of a
document including a plurality of columns, comprising: means
for recognizing, using image processing, empty space next to
one of said columns ....” In summary, claims 13, 14, 28, and
29 each recite using image processing to recognize empty space
next to a column in an image of a document.
The examiner fails to show a teaching or suggestion of
the claimed limitation. Here, the passage of Watanabe on
which the examiner relies does teach column alignment. He
does not allege, let alone show, however, that the column
alignment uses image
processing. It is possible, if not probable, that the
reference’s column alignment operates on character codes
rather than on an image.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007