Appeal No. 2002-2239
Application No. 08/876,450
picture signal-processing devices as independent units; and
a controllable switching device having outputs connected to
the inputs of the picture signal-processing devices, and having
inputs connected to the outputs of the picture signal-processing
devices enabling free allocation of the picture signal-processing
devices to the at least one picture signal source and to the
outputs of the arrangement.
3. An arrangement as claimed in claim 1, characterized in
that controllable switching device comprises a computer-controlled
crossbar having outputs and inputs to which the inputs and
outputs, respectively, of the picture signal-processing devices
are connected.
4. An arrangement as claimed in claim 1, characterized in
that [the] central operation unit comprises a production box
arranged centrally in a studio or mobile unit, the picture signal-
processing devices and the controllable switching device being
accommodated in said production box.
5. An arrangement as claimed in claim 4, characterized in
that the picture signal-processing devices are implemented as
fixedly wired slide-in units which are slidable into the
production box and are connectable to the controllable switching
device via slide-in contacts or software modules.
The References
In rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. §102(b) and 35 U.S.C.
§103(a), the examiner relies upon the following references:
Ritter et al. (Ritter) 5,001,473 Mar. 19, 1991
Esch et al. (Esch) 5,099,319 Mar. 24, 1992
Drako et al. (Drako) 5,446,866 Aug. 29, 1995
The Rejections
Claims 1, 2, and 4 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(b) as
being anticipated by Esch.
Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over Esch in view of Drako.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007