Appeal No. 1999-1694
Application No. 08/474,903
column 10, line 41 of Wada. Wada further provides for the
variation of the amount of image data to be output as discussed
in the description of the zooming and panning operations in which
data is continuously read out of the CCD 1. (Wada, column 15,
lines 5-15). We further note that, with regard to claim 51, we
find Appellants’ arguments to the effect that Wada does not
disclose the controlling of the sampling rate of the sensed image
data to be unpersuasive since there is no sampling “rate”
requirement in the claim.
Lastly, while we found Appellants’ arguments to be
unpersuasive with respect to the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 102
rejection of claims 18-29, 39, 42, 44-46, and 51, we reach the
opposite conclusion with respect to dependent claim 41.
Dependent claim 41 is directed to the feature of providing for
the variation of the data amount from the image sensor by
skipping a part of the input image data. We find no disclosure
in Wada, and the Examiner has pointed to none, that would satisfy
this claim requirement. We would also point out that this same
data skipping feature is present in claims 38 and 55, which the
Examiner has indicated to be allowable. Accordingly, since all
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007