Appeal No. 1998-0875
Application No. 08/210,529
no suggestion or teaching in Welsh to determine the position
of the fast moving portions of the image at the receiving side
based on the received video frame, so as to synthesize frames
based on the speech information.” With respect to Ejiri,
appellant argues (brief, page 9) that:
The arrangement of Ejiri is completely different
from the present invention as claimed. For example,
there is no teaching or suggestion in Ejiri to
synthesize video frames and insert them between
adjacent received video frames. Ejiri’s purpose was
to avoid transmission of video images during a
telephone conversation. The translated Ejiri
specification (of record) at p. 3 indicates that the
transmission of “timed images” using “conventional
television telephones” are not satisfactory for
general purpose systems because of the “increased
volume of signals that have (sic) to be transmitted
per hour.” Ejiri thus conceives of his inventive
concept as an alternative to teleconferencing
systems of the types that employ transmission of
video images, such as the one proposed by the
applicant . . . .
Furthermore, Ejiri does not suggest or teach an
apparatus or a method that employs an associating
system for retrieving facial feature information
from a received video frame and using that
information to synthesize an image frame . . . .
We agree with appellant's arguments. Thus, “[w]ith
respect to the pending claims in the present application, the
references cited by the Examiner fail to provide any teaching
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007