Appeal No. 1998-1322 Page 3
Application No. 08/454,068
Claim 5, which is representative for our purposes,
follows:
5. A picture signal decoding method comprising
the steps of:
receiving an encoded signal including an encoded
picture and a header indicating which of frame-based
predictive encoding and field-based predictive
encoding was used to encode said encoded picture,
said encoded picture being encoded with the one of
said frame-based predictive encoding and said field-
based predictive encoding which produces the lesser
amount of data;
frame-based predictively decoding said encoded
picture when said header indicates that said encoded
picture was encoded using frame-based predictive
encoding; and
field-based predictively decoding said encoded
picture when said header indicates that said encoded
picture was encoded using field-based predictive
encoding.
The reference relied on in rejecting the claims follows:
Krause et al. 5,091,782 Feb. 25,
1992.
(Krause)
Claims 5, 11, 14, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) as anticipated by Krause. Rather than repeat the
arguments of the appellants or examiner in toto, we refer the
reader to the briefs and answers for the respective details
thereof.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007