Ex Parte HULL et al - Page 4




               Appeal No. 2001-0872                                                                                                   
               Application No. 08/880,137                                                                                             


               through 9) concerning the teachings of Chou and Kopec.  According to the examiner, Chou teaches                        
               “computing probability as a layout parameter” (answer, page 4), and “using the values from training                    
               images (templates, col. 4, lines 15-35)” (answer, page 5).                                                             
                       Appellants argue (brief, pages 9 through 12) that the references of record neither teach nor                   
               would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art to train a processor-controlled machine to                    
               determine an unknown value of a text image layout parameter used with a two-dimensional image                          
               model.  Although appellants acknowledge (brief, page 10) that “Chou does disclose a ‘training                          
               mode’ . . . at column 4, lines 9-33, col. 9, lines 45-51, and col. 10, lines 1-16,” they do indicate,                  
               however, that “Chou’s ‘training mode’ refers to the possibility of re-training probabilities associated                
               with the objects in Chou’s library of bitmapped templates” (brief, page 11).  Appellants’ argue                        
               (brief, page 11) that:                                                                                                 
                       It is important to observe that these trained and retrained probabilities do not                               
                       correspond in any way to the layout parameters trained in Applicants’ current                                  
                       invention.  Probabilities, quite simply, are not layout parameters as defined by                               
                       Applicants.  See Applicants’ specification, which expressly states, “a text image                              
                       layout parameter does not include a probability parameter that may be associated                               
                       with or included in a 2D image model, since a probability parameter is not a quantity                          
                       on which a layout procedure depends to map an image constituent from its symbolic                              
                       description of its location in a text image to an actual physical location in the image.”                      
                       Page 34, lines 6-10. Contrary to the Examiner’s unsubstantiated assertion, Chou does                           
                       not teach parameterizing x-y coordinates, point size, or any other layout parameters                           
                       in any manner similar to Applicants’.                                                                          
                       In response to appellants’ arguments, the examiner now contends (answer, page 11) that:                        
                       Examiner was relying upon Kopec to teach layout parameters are determined from                                 
                       the individual image constituents such as “f and g” on page 69.  And training of such                          
                       would be obvious in light of Chou because the layout parameters must be calculated                             
                                                                  4                                                                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007