Appeal No. 1999-1799
Application No. 08/738,507
insufficient evidence of prima facie obviousness or by rebutting the prima facie case with
evidence of secondary indicia of nonobviousness.” In re Rouffet, 149 F.3d 1350, 1355,
47 USPQ2d 1453, 1455 (CAFC 1998). Here, we agree with appellant that the examiner’s
rejection lacks support in the prior art references applied for the invention as claimed.
Therefore, we find that appellant has overcome the rejection by showing insufficient
evidence to establish a prima facie case of obviousness.
Appellant argues Yoshimura, Kinoshita and Bell disclose the recordation of audio data
with a still camera or system rather than having the audio snippets prerecorded in a
database and using an associated identification code as recited in the language of claim
1. (See brief at page 3.) We agree with appellant. From our review of the applied prior
art, the prior art merely recognizes the well-known association of audio data with picture
data. The examiner has not identified any teaching or line of reasoning with respect to the
use of a prerecorded database of audio snippets and associated identification codes nor
the use of a scene identification display including an identification code associated with
the scene.
The examiner maintains that Yoshimura teaches the use of a prerecorded database in
voice data memory 9c. While this memory stores data for output, it is not audio data with
an associated identification code which can be sensed by a camera as recited in element
(c) of the instant claim 1. The examiner further maintains that Yoshimura teaches the use
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007