Appeal No. 2002-1474 Page 15
Application No. 09/002,927
requires significant reconstruction at the receiver V. As
stated, supra, the fact that the video images are reconstructed
implies that they were originally images before they were encoded
and transmitted to the receiver. In addition, from the
disclosure of Liebesny that the information is broken down into
graphics, etc., and that the previously recorded information
will be played back visually, we find that the received
information was in graphic form. Nor are we persuaded by
appellants assertion (brief, page 9) that the difference between
the claimed invention and the Liebesny-Furuya combination is that
the claimed invention provides the opportunity to transmit image
data showing traffic congestion and superimpose an indication of
the driver's position on the display so that the driver can see a
combined display of the driver's position in relation to the
transmitted traffic congestion. In Furuya, the display includes
images of traffic congestion of monitored roads, along with a
display of the driver's position. What Furuya does not disclose
is the receipt of image data by the receiver located in the
vehicle. It is Liebesny that is relied upon for this feature.
We find that in Furuya, the reference is not very specific as to
how the input for receiving means 101 is obtained. Liebesny is
very specific as to having inputs to the service provider from
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007