Interference No. 104,681
Spears v. Holland
The body portion of Spears' preliminary motion adds further
confusion. For instance, from the middle of page 5 to the top of
page 6, the motion reproduces certain content from U.S. Patent
No. 4,823,204 (Exhibit 2005), from U.S. Patent No. 4,633,293
(Exhibit 2006), and from U.S. Patent No. 5,353,119 (Exhibit
2008). With reference to these reproduced content, the motion on
page 7, lines 4-5 states: "It is submitted that such teachings
fully anticipate the preamble and step a) of Claim 21 and the
preamble and element a) of Claim 22." A review of the reproduced
content from U.S. Patent No. 4,823,204, indicates, however, that
that disclosure corresponds only to what is in the premble of
claims 21 and 22 and not to step a) in either claim. The
reproduced content from U.S. Patent No. 4,823,204 is this:
"To convert from a film to a tape a flying spot scanner
or telecine is used. A source of light, as for example
a laser beam or light from a phosphorous screen, scans
the film in a raster or line-by-line fashion. The
transmitted light is converted into an electrical
signal through known means and stored on a video tape."
At most, the above-quoted text anticipates only the preamble
portion of Holland's claim 21 or claim 22 and not step (a) in
claim 21 which reads:
reading substantially more vertical lines of
information from a motion picture film image than is
available on said output video signal;
19
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007