Appeal No. 1999-2719
Application No. 08/637,807
The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 28 and 29 is
likewise sustained because appellants have chosen to let
these claims stand or fall with claim 25 (brief, page 3).
With respect to claims 26, 27 and 30, appellants
argue (brief, page 13) that Yoshimura and the Official
Notice fail to teach “identification of less than all of
the pictures from a larger set of pictures.” We
disagree. Yoshimura clearly explains that the video disk
116 has two multiple image planes stored thereon, and
that only one of the image planes is displayed at any one
time in a 5x5 matrix (Figure 12; column 10, lines 63
through 68). In view of the teachings of Yoshimura, the
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection of claims 26, 27 and 30 is
sustained.
Turning lastly to the obviousness rejection of claim
31, we agree with the appellants’ argument (brief, page
15) that “storing both medium resolution pictures and low
resolution pictures is contrary to the Examiner’s
proposed motivation to combine.” The 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
rejection of claim 31 is reversed because the applied
references and the Official Notice neither teach nor
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007