Appeal No. 2000-2184
Application 08/629,626
Arguments which appellant could have made but chose not to make
in the brief have not been considered and are deemed to be waived
by appellant [see 37 CFR § 1.192(a)].
With respect to independent claims 1, 6, 11 and 17, it is
the examiner’s position that Yamada teaches the claimed invention
except for the application of its method to captured film images.
The examiner notes that the admitted prior art teaches that
contrast detection of captured film images using high pass
filters was well known in the art. The examiner finds that the
artisan would have the basic knowledge that signals generated
from the graininess of the film would have high frequencies in
which the contrast of the image varies most due to defocusing.
The examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to the
artisan to apply the method of Yamada to extract film image
signals caused by the graininess of the film to simplify the
construction of the hardware [answer, pages 4-5].
With respect to claims 1, 6 and 17, appellant argues that
the high frequency signals extracted in Yamada are not signals
caused by the graininess of the film, and appellant argues that
the admitted prior art does not disclose or suggest that the
focus of the film could be adjusted using an image contrast value
which is calculated from signals related to the graininess of the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007