Appeal No. 1999-2449
Application No. 08/745,584 Page 10
obvious to have carried out the "additional corrections" of
Gonzales using the motion estimation unit of figure 12b; and
(b)the examiner has not pointed out how Greenfield makes up for
the basic deficiencies of Gonzales.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims
1, 2, 5-9, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed. The
examiner's decision to reject claims 3, 11, 12, and 17 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007