Appeal No. 2001-2697
Application No. 08/770,048 Page 10
references, that after the image of Zelten was corrected, the
corrected image would be used as the customer's input image in
McDonald which is scanned in and then stored in the XTP of
McDonald. This modification, along with the factual evidence of
the Official notice taken by the examiner would not result in the
claimed invention because as taught by McDonald, the original
image stored in the XTP is used in creation of the final page
layout. Since the XTP image has already been scanned at high
resolution, there is no reason why an artisan would be motivated
to rescan the same image at the same resolution and resave the
same image in the XTP because the high resolution image used in
the final page layout is already in the XTP.
In addition, we recognize that Zelten is closer to the
claimed invention than is McDonald because Zelten
photoelectrically reads on claim 2 with the exception of the
image composition including type of text, position of text,
margin information, composite image size information, and
composite image orientation information 1. Zelten lacks the
desired image composition types because Zelten discloses
correcting color density, tone scale, inter-color hue, color
saturation, and sharpness (col. 3, line 60 through col. 4, line
1 At the Oral Hearing, counsel for appellants clarified, in response to
a question from the Board, that claim 2 requires each of the listed types of
image composition.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007