Appeal No. 1998-2577
Application No. 08/594,054
Appellants’ claimed invention in that Appellants repeat or
delete encoded data blocks. Appellants’ data blocks are of a
fixed time period as opposed to waveforms which vary in time
period. Thus, although Asada repeats or deletes a waveform,
the waveform is very different than Appellants’ data block.
That is, Asada’s prior art is repeating or deleting unencoded
waveforms that do not have a fixed time period (i.e.,
waveforms having varying time periods), as opposed to
Appellants’ encoded data blocks (blocks which have a fixed
time period).
Appellants argue that Asada’s second system, Asada’s main
embodiment, differs from that claimed by Appellants in that
Asada varies playback speed by stretching or compressing data
blocks, not repeating or deleting data blocks as claimed by
Appellants. (brief-pages 10 and 11.)
We agree with Appellants that Asada’s prior art and main
embodiment each individually fails to teach the argued
limitations of both independent claims 1 and 14.
The Examiner responds that the rejection combines the
repeating or deleting teachings of Asada’s prior art
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007