Appeal No. 1998-1334
Application No. 08/350,141
block has the same mean value as the luminance signal of the
current block, and selecting a block from the previous frame
having a minimum sum of differences between the luminance
value of each pixel as compared to the luminance value of each
pixel in the block of the current frame, to generate a motion
vector. Appellants also argue that Iu discloses generating a
motion vector and a corrected motion vector. Appellants
further argue that the only averaging performed in Iu occurs
after the generation of both motion vectors.
The Examiner’s response to Appellants’ argument on page 7
of the answer states that the averaging function is disclosed
by Iu in column 10, equation 6. The Examiner argues that
claim 1 recites “producing a mean value of a luminance signal
with regard to a block of the current frame” is met by Iu’s
equation 6.
On page 4 of the reply brief, Appellants argue that the
Examiner’s interpretation is inconsistent with the
specification. Appellants argue that the interpretation of
claim 1 should be viewed that the claim language limits
computing the first mean value of a block in the current
frame. Appellants further argue that Iu fails to teach
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007