Appeal No. 1999-1892
Application No. 08/883,157
Claims 1 through 3, 6, 7, 10 and 17 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Butterfield.
Reference is made to the examiner’s rejection (paper
number 21), the brief (paper number 28) for appellants’
position in response to the rejection, and the answer (paper
number 29) for the examiner’s response to appellants’
position.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before
us, and we will sustain the obviousness rejection of claims
10 and 17, and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of
claims 1 through 3, 6 and 7.
Appellants acknowledge that in Butterfield three-
dimensional color images or anaglyphs of a scene are
produced by combining the red image plane from a left color
video camera with the blue and green image planes from a
right color video camera (appellants’ declaration (paper
number 25), page 1, paragraph 3). Appellants argue (brief,
page 9) that Butterfield’s method and apparatus differs from
the claimed method and apparatus in that NTSC encoding with
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007