Appeal No. 1999-0003 Page 11
Application No. 08/642,742
lies hierarchically above a low level format and
hierarchically below both the first high level encoding format
and a second high level format, wherein the second high level
is different from the first high level encoding format ....”
Therefore, we reverse the rejection of claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 10,
12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26, and 29 as being obvious over
Loizides in view of Naimpally and the rejection of claims 6,
7, 13, 14, 20, 21, 27, and 28 as being obvious over Loizides
in view of Naimpally further in view of Ackland.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claims 1, 3, 5-8, 10, 12-
15, 17, 19-22, 24, and 26-29 under § 103(a) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007