Ex Parte TAKISHIMA et al - Page 2



         Appeal No. 2002-0745                                                       
         Application 08/893,379                                                     

         as providing a solution which will enable the encoding of a video          
         signal which considers the coding history of the video signal              
         when the actual coding parameters are not available.                       
         Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                           
              1. A method for second or later generation coding of a                
         video signal in tandem stage coding which includes a previous              
         stage coding process and a later stage coding process which are            
         separately and sequentially executed, comprising the steps of:             
                   estimating at least one coding parameter used in the             
         previous stage coding process in accordance with picture                   
         properties of the video signal coded by said previous stage                
         coding process; and                                                        
                   secondly coding the video signal coded by said previous          
         stage coding process, based upon the estimated coding parameter.           
         The examiner relies on the following references:                           
         Trew                             4,941,044       July 10, 1990             
         Fuchigama et al. (Fuchigama)     5,079,547       Jan. 07, 1992             
         Murakami et al. (Murakami)       5,367,335       Nov. 22, 1994             
         Tahara                           5,412,428       May  02, 1995             
         Lin et al. (Lin)                 5,485,214       Jan. 16, 1996             
         The following rejections are on appeal before us:                          
         1. Claims 1 and 13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                          
         ' 102(b) as being anticipated by the disclosure of Murakami.               
         2. Claims 9 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                          
         ' 103(a) as being unpatentable over the teachings of Murakami              
         taken alone.                                                               
         3. Claims 2, 4-6, 14 and 16-18 stand rejected under                        
                                         2                                          




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007