Appeal No. 2000-0238
Application 08/342,283
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellants and the
examiner, reference is made to the brief and the answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
We reverse.
Even though we reverse the outstanding rejection as a whole,
we do agree with the examiner’s position that the use of the
various patterns of blocks depicted in Figure 11, with examples
given in Figures 12 and 13, do teach a segmentation circuit
employing template-matching filters to identify unique pixel
structures.
Since the reference does discuss Figure 11 in the paragraph
bridging columns 5-6, the block sorting operation associated with
Figure 11 clearly is undertaken based upon the 16 foreground
patterns in Figure 11 that have been prepared beforehand. This
sorting operation is equivalent to the template matching function
of the segmentation circuit claimed.
However, we part company with the examiner’s views that the
feature of the segmentation circuit further comprising “a logic
filter for removing the particular, unique binary pixel structure
from the region of the image stored in said memory to produce an
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007