Appeal No. 1998-0882
Application 08/598,416
c) means, within said single image processor, for
concurrently spatially transforming each said sampled portion
of said image pixel data in sequence while said means for
sampling is sampling a subsequent portion of image pixel data;
and
d) second means, within said single image
processor, for transferring each said spatially transformed
portion of said image pixel data to a pixel display memory for
display.
The Examiner relies on the following reference:
Matsumoto 5,404,445 Apr. 4, 1995
(filed Oct. 31, 1991)
Claims 1, 4 through 7 and 10 through 12 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over
Matsumoto.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants
and the Examiner, reference is made to the brief and answer
for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
After a careful review of the evidence before us, we
will not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 4 through 7 and 10
through 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
The Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie
case. It is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007