Appeal No. 2001-0945
Application No. 08/908,129
Prior art references relied upon by the examiner on appeal
are:
Peterson 4,020,762 May 3, 1977
Saikawa et al. (Saikawa) 4,501,811 Feb. 26, 1985
Monbaliu et al. (Monbaliu) 5,283,156 Feb. 1, 1994
Stoffel et al. (Stoffel), “A Survey of Electronic Techniques for
Pictorial Image Reproduction,” IEEE Trans. On Comm., Vol. COM-
29(12), pp. 1898-1925 (Dec. 1981).
All of the appealed claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 for obviousness. Claims 1, 4, 6 and 10-14 stand rejected
in view of either Saikawa or Monbaliu, with each taken in
combination with Stoffel. Claims 1, 4, 5 and 10-14 stand
rejected in view of Peterson in combination with Stoffel.
We have carefully considered the entire record on appeal in
light of the opposing positions taken by the appellants and the
examiner. Having done so, we conclude that the examiner has
established a sound prima facie case of obviousness with respect
to all of the rejected claims, and that the arguments relied upon
by the appellants are insufficient to overcome the evidence of
obviousness relied upon by the examiner. Accordingly, we shall
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007