Appeal No. 1999-2698
Application 08/560,108
In addition, Appellant asserts that there is no
motivation present in either reference, alone or in
combination, to make such a modification to Bajura based on
Sutherland, and that a person in possession of Bajura would
not look to optical-see-through technology for solving video-
see-through problems evident from these references.
Furthermore, Appellant states that even if one looked to
optical-see-through technology for solving video-see-through
problems, it would merely suggest a prestored image of a
stationary hanging virtual object, and there would be no
prestored positions and geometrical features of real objects
and no integration with moving virtual objects.
In regard to the "Other Applications" of Bajura12
Appellant asserts that there is no need shown or suggested to
replace any total virtual environment and there is no hint to
except moving virtual objects (Appellant's emphasis).
Finally, Appellant argues that the preamble of claim 113
recites the "lag" problem to which Appellant's invention is
12Page 209, column 1.
13Brief, pages 17 and 18.
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007