Appeal No. 1999-2698
Application 08/560,108
with sensed images (but of a real fetus with ultrasound, not a
virtual object), one or more monitors responsive to the
actions of the viewer acting as the cameraman, and a head
mounted display responsive to the integrated image signal for
providing integrated images of the object space with the
images of the fetus.
Furthermore, Appellant admits that Bajura suggests a non-8
real-time image, such as a building or addition before
construction, in "other applications" under Section 6.2 on
page 209. This non-real-time image would most likely be
prestored and
be of virtual objects. However, Appellant contends that
Bajura fails to suggest prestoring positions and geometric
features of real objects in a computer model.
Appellant then contends that a person of ordinary skill9
in this art in possession of both Bajura and Sutherland would
not use the prestored images of Sutherland to modify Bajura to
carry
8Brief, page 7; Reply Brief, page 2.
9Brief, page 8.
10
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007