Appeal No. 2000-1501
Application No. 08/745,587
The examiner points out that the encoder and decoder libraries of Feng
obviously contain a generic feature representation of an information quantity and a
corresponding symbolic code as provided by the tables in at least Figure 5, “since the
information therein is at least generic to at least the different image features of low and
sharp variations common or ‘generic’ to all images” [answer-page 6]. Thus, the
examiner has given a broad, yet apparently reasonable, interpretation to the term
“generic”
While appellant argues that Feng does not disclose “generic objects” in the
libraries, appellant has not presented any convincing argument or evidence as to why
the objects in Feng’s table may not be considered to be “generic” even though the
examiner has reasonably explained why the objects are considered to be “generic,” i.e.,
because information is common to all images.
Appellant also argues that Feng does not disclose that the claimed library sets
may be unrelated to the information stream. First, claim 1 requires no such limitation.
But, in any event, the fact that appellant is arguing that a claimed distinction is that
library sets may be unrelated to the information stream, means that even in appellant’s
view, the library sets may also be related to the information stream. Therefore, by the
language of the very argument employed by appellant, it would appear that the library
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007