Appeal No. 1998-0733
Application 08/489,867
finds that the operations must be carried out by sequentially
executed control programs stored in the CPU ROM 1 (EA4).
Accordingly, the Examiner interprets the plurality of
processing means to be the circuits 4-9, the CPU, and the
control programs.
It is clear that Mogi does not teach Appellants'
disclosed invention. In Appellants' invention, the received
television signal (comprised of sound signal SND and composite
video signal CVBS) is digitized and operations are performed
on it in digital signal processor 4 according to operations
stored in memory. In Mogi, special purpose integrated
circuits 4-9 perform operations on the television signal under
control of the CPU 1; the operations are not performed by the
CPU. While there is always a possibility that claims, as
presented, may be interpreted in such a way as to read in an
unintended manner on the prior art, we do not find that to be
the case here.
We agree with Appellants' arguments. Claim 1 requires
that the processing means that executes respective processing
operations on a received television signal be the single
processing unit. In Mogi, the processing means that execute
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007