Appeal No. 2002-1705
Application 09/132,751
independent claim 5 on page 14 of the reply brief. In
particular, Appellant points out that the citations relied on by
the Examiner in Cullen teach reclassification of rectangles after
skew correction and do not disclose or suggest the steps recited
in Appellant’s claim 5.
Upon our careful review of Cullen, we fail to find that
Cullen teaches the claimed limitations as recited in Appellant’s
claims 1 through 9. In particular, we find that Cullen teaches a
method and apparatus for segmenting a document image into areas
containing text, images and straight lines. See column 2, lines
48 through 49. Furthermore, Cullen teaches that document
segmentation is done by providing a bit-mapped representation of
the document image, compressing the bit-mapped representation
into compressed scanlines, extracting run lengths for each
compressed scanline from the bit-mapped representation of the
document image, constructing rectangles from the run lengths,
initially classifying each of the rectangles as either text,
image or as a vertical or horizontal line; detecting and;
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007