Appeal No. 1997-2774
Application No. 08/080,471
equivalent to appellant's disclosed "means for augmenting the
received digital samples." Accordingly, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claim 4 and its dependent,
claim 5.
Claim 31 is the method equivalent of claim 4. Thus,
claim 31 includes a step of "augmenting the received digital
samples with a plurality of digital samples representing
augmenting data whereby the resulting sequence of digital
samples can be converted to an electrical signal." The
examiner combines Tanaka, Coutta, and Beaulier to reject the
claim. Tanaka does not disclose any augmenting data of any
sort. Thus, the examiner relies on Coutta and Beaulier for
the augmentation step. As indicated above, neither Coutta nor
Beaulier teaches augmenting digital samples as claimed.
Therefore, we cannot sustain the rejection of claim 31 and its
dependents, claims 32 and 33.
Claim 14 includes a means for generating an electrical
signal from the sequence of integers representing the scene
and the time at which the sequence was received. Although the
rejection involves Tanaka and Coutta, as indicated above,
Tanaka does not disclose any time data. Thus, the rejection
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007