Appeal No. 1998-2683
Application 08/579,386
invention based on these teachings [id.].
Appellant argues that the examiner has misunderstood
what is described and claimed when a background color of a
pixel is referred to. Appellant also argues that Vaughn
teaches the use of process black or color black based on the
state of neighboring pixels, and appellant argues that the
test in Vaughn is not the same test as the claimed test and
that the Vaughn test produces different results from the
claimed invention [brief, pages 4-6]. The examiner responds
that the Vaughn test and the claimed invention are “closely
related,” and the background color of the claimed invention is
“interpreted to mean[s] the background pixel(s) under test
includes a neighboring pixel(s) which is also used by Vaughn
et al.” [answer, page 7].
We agree with the position argued by appellant.
Although Vaughn and the claimed invention each determines
whether a pixel to be printed in black should be printed using
color black or process black, Vaughn uses a different test to
make this determination, and the result of Vaughn’s test does
not produce the same results as the claimed invention for all
pixels. Specifically, Vaughn and the claimed invention would
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007