Appeal No. 1999-1892
Application No. 08/883,157
obvious to the skilled artisan to eliminate the
NTSC/matrixing function from Butterfield. The only
rationale of record for making such a modification to
Butterfield is impermissible hindsight (brief, pages 6 and
7).
Based upon the foregoing, the obviousness rejection of
claims 1 through 3, 6 and 7 is reversed.
Turning to claims 10 and 17, we agree with the
examiner’s statement (paper number 21, page 4) that the
three-dimensional color image making in Butterfield can be
computer controlled based upon the teachings of Butterfield
(column 22, lines 12 through 65). Thus, the obviousness
rejection of claims 10 and 17 is sustained because these
claims do not preclude either the color matrixing or the
cameras used in Butterfield.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1 through
3, 6, 7, 10 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed as to
claims 10 and 17, and is reversed as to claims 1 through 3,
6 and 7. Accordingly, the decision of the examiner is
affirmed-in-part.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007