Appeal No. 1999-0142
Application 08/542,330
a synthesizing step for synthesizing the bright line
signal with the image signal.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Seely 4,557,578 December 10, 1985
Strobel 4,589,749 May 20, 1986
Claims 29-40 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Strobel and Seely.
We refer to the final rejection (Paper No. 67) and the
examiner's answer (Paper No. 73) (pages referred to as "EA__") for a
statement of the Examiner's position, and to the appeal brief (Paper
No. 72) (pages referred to as "Br__") and the reply brief (Paper
No. 74) (pages referred to as "RBr__") for a statement of Appellants'
arguments thereagainst. The Examiner noted entry of the reply brief
(Paper No. 75).
OPINION
Strobel and Seely are directed to camera viewfinders, not image
signal processing. It is clear that neither reference is directed to
Appellants' disclosed invention of a signal processing system and
method for electronically processing an original image signal to add
a cross screen filter effect to the still image after it is
photographed. Nevertheless, it is possible that claim language can
be so broad that it reads on or is rendered obvious over prior art in
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007