Appeal No. 2002-1137
Application No. 08/761,854
(e) in response to a conflict, automatically generating a unique image
name for the image data from the external source using the count associated
with the image data from the external source.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Kuba et al. (Kuba) 5,806,072 Sep. 8, 1998
(filed Dec. 21, 1992)
Claims 2, 6, and 14-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as being
anticipated by Kuba.
We refer to the Final Rejection (Paper No. 16) and the Examiner’s Answer
(Paper No. 27) for a statement of the examiner’s position and to the Brief (Paper No.
26) for appellants’ position with respect to the claims which stand rejected.
OPINION
Kuba describes an electronic imaging apparatus (e.g., a digital still camera)
having a hierarchical image data structure for computer-compatible image data
management. The camera generates a unique file name for an image, in the format
shown in Figure 144. The file name comprises a fixed portion, a date and time
calculation result, a serial number, and an auxiliary file name (file extension). The date
and time calculation is based on an actual date and time, as known to the camera, and
generated using a hash function that is depicted in Figure 145. Col. 50, ll. 12-50.
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007