Appeal No. 2001-2013
Application No. 08/869,592
data). Nowhere does Smidth add a block number to the data.
Smidth, using the algorithm at the bottom of column 9, merely
determines the order in which various blocks are selected for
shuffling. Nothing is added to the data.
Similarly, claim 13 requires that the quantization level be
added to the data (both to the coded data and also to the
quantized data). Smidth determines and uses quantizing factors,
but nowhere does Smidth indicate that the quantizing level is
added to the data. Accordingly, we cannot sustain the
anticipation rejection of claims 12 and 13.
Regarding independent claim 10, the examiner admits that
Gonzales fails to disclose shuffling the data and adding timing
and shuffling information in the header. The examiner turns to
Siracusa for including timing information in the header and to
Smidth for shuffling the data. However, although Smidth
discloses shuffling data, Smidth does not disclose or suggest
adding shuffling information to the header. As neither Gonzales
nor Siracusa teaches or suggests adding shuffling information to
the header either, we cannot sustain the rejection of claim 10
and its dependents, claims 3 through 5 and 11.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007