Appeal No. 1999-2640
Application 08/918,267
(Kato, col. 1, lines 24-30). Where a surface shape
(configuration) of an object to be mapped is not known, the
shape has been assumed and texture processing has been carried
out on a trial and error basis (Kato, col. 1, lines 36-43).
Kato discloses three ways of estimating a three-dimensional
shape of an object to be mapped which minimize trial and error
factors.
It is clear that Kato is not directed to the same method
of generating textures as the claimed invention. The claimed
invention does not employ texture mapping, but uses an
evaluation function, such as those in Appellant's Figs. 3-5.
Nor does the claimed invention involve estimating a
three-dimensional shape on a surface of an object as in Kato,
because the shape is defined by the input line segments. To
the extent the Examiner considers that the claims are so broad
that they read on Kato, despite the differences in actual
invention, it is the Examiner's duty to explain how the claims
are interpreted broadly to read on Kato.
Appellant argues that Kato does not disclose any of the
three steps of claim 1 (Br4-5). We agree. The Examiner finds
that generating line points located on line segments is shown
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007