Appeal No. 2001-2575
Application No. 09/074,545
of Hirano which relates to searching for individual, still-frame
images since the transformations required for compression of
images would have prolonged the search process in Hirano (brief,
pages 5 & 6). Additionally, Appellant asserts that Kuroshima is
merely concerned with the resolution, not the size, of an image
data and therefore, does not remedy the deficiency of other
references related to the claimed compression of small amounts of
image data (brief, page 7; reply brief, page 3).
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner asserts
that both Hirano and Normile are directed to the problem of data
compression in order to reduce the amount of stored data and to
save storage space (answer, page 13). The Examiner further
argues that as Normile provides for compression of video images
using “inter” and “intra” frame designations, one of ordinary
skill in the art would have applied the same method of treating
an intra frame in the video sequence of Normile to compress the
still images of Hirano (id.).
In rejecting claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Examiner
bears the initial burden of presenting a prima facie case of
obviousness. See In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1532, 28 USPQ2d
1955, 1956 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The conclusion that the claimed
subject matter is obvious must be supported by evidence, as shown
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007