Appeal No. 1998-1110
Application No. 08/391,263
relied upon by
the Examiner fails to teach these limitations, for the same
reasons specified with respect to claim 1.
Claims 3 and 5 recite the reverse process, a method for
image expansion, including first and second parallel
separation into first and second aggregates or "subsets," each
aggregate or subset including copies of fewer picture elements
than the "representation" or prior aggregate being expanded to
form it. The prior art relied upon by the Examiner teaches
decompression by processes inverse to those used for
compression. Thus, none of the references relied upon teach
parallel separation into second aggregates or subsets, each
including copies of fewer picture elements than each of the
first aggregates or subsets. We therefore fail to find that
the combination proposed by the Examiner would have resulted
in the invention claimed in claims 2-5 and 8-10.
The Federal Circuit states that "[t]he mere fact that the
prior art may be modified in the manner suggested by the
Examiner does not make the modification obvious unless the
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007