Appeal No. 1999-2824
Application 08/481,408
brief (Paper No. 25) (pages referred to as "Br__") for a
statement of Appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Anticipation ) claims 43 and 44
The issue is whether Lett teaches the following
limitations of claim 43:
feature control means, responsive to user input
control, for generating VRR video feature control data to
determine the operation of said video device such that,
in response to said feature control data being provided
from said VRR system to said video device when present,
at least one VRR video feature function is performed in
whole or in part by said video device . . . .
Appellant notes that all of the claimed arrangements
pertain to a video device for performing VRR video functions,
such as freeze frame and slow motion, in response to
instructions from the VRR device (Br4). It is argued (Br4-5):
"Television receiver 352 in Lett does not perform any VCR
video feature functions, nor does Lett suggest such operation.
In fact, as far as applicant can tell, Lett never mentions VCR
special features functions, for example freeze-frame, as
discussed by applicant and as specifically claimed in claims
44, 46 and 47."
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007