Appeal No. 2000-2094
Application No. 08/923,369
of Lang and Takada would not provide for control of the substituted
digital video tape recorder taught by Takada through the editing
digital control unit 14 of Lang.
After careful review of the Lang and Takada references, as
well as the Examiner’s position as stated in the record, we do not
find this argument of Appellants to be persuasive. In our view,
the illustration in Figure 2 of Lang, as well as the accompanying
description at column 5, lines 49-52, provides a clear disclosure
of the editing control of tape recording unit 11 by the digital
control unit 14. We further find no support in the disclosures of
either Lang or Takada, nor any suggestion in the Examiner’s stated
position, for Appellants’ conclusion (Brief, page 8) that the only
connection to Takada’s substituted digital video tape recorder
would be through Lang’s fiber optic port 18.
We further find to be unpersuasive Appellants’ arguments
(Brief, pages 9 and 10) asserting a failure to show motivation for
modifying Lang with an addition of a high speed A/D converter, and
a failure to show the obviousness of replacing Lang’s memory 13
with a disc recorder. In our opinion, Appellants’ arguments
related to the Examiner’s establishment of a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to these features is misplaced. As
pointed out by the Examiner (Answer, page 15) no modification of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007