Ex parte WASTI et al. - Page 3




          Appeal No. 1998-0931                                       Page 3           
          Application No. 08/139,619                                                  


               a control logic circuit coupled to the digital processor,              
          operable to feed said image data into means for storing a                   
          pixel field;                                                                
               video encoder means coupled to the control logic circuit,              
          for converting the pixel field into a composite video output;               
               a plurality of video buffers coupled to the composite                  
          video output of the video encoder means, operable to transmit               
          video information in a standard commercial television format;               
          and,                                                                        
               a plurality of standard commercial television receivers                
          coupled respectively to the video buffers, and operable to                  
          display said image, said receiver being non-interactive with                
          players and limited to display of said information respecting               
          progress of said wagering game.                                             
               The prior art references of record relied upon by the                  
          examiner in rejecting the appealed claims are:                              
          Hedges et al.            4,339,798             Jul. 13, 1982                
          (Hedges)                                                                    
          Yamamura                 5,059,955                Oct. 21,                  
          1991                                                                        
                                             (Filed Aug. 30, 1988)                    
          Tillery et al.           5,114,155             May  19, 1992                
          (Tillery)                          (Filed Feb. 20, 1991)                    


               Claims 15 and 18-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103               
          as being unpatentable over Hedges in view of Tillery.  Claims               
          16 and 17 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable              










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007