Appeal No. 2003-0556
Application 09/185,248
or mixing common PCM sampled information is taught as well.
This reference also appears to suggest the subject matter of
dependent claim 2 and the encoding clause of independent claim
12, which are not argued but which are indirectly reflected in
the arguments presented by appellants with respect to claim 20
which recites essentially the same feature of encoding the
combined data stream in a second compressed format before it is
received by a CODEC device. The architecture of Figure 1 at page
569 of Bergher indicates that there are plural channels of PCM
data outputted but as well that there is also formatted or
encoded digitized output information of a common channel. This
feature is also shown by the formatted 296 to the far right of
Farhangi's Figure 2.
When looked at in the proper perspective, appellants'
disclosed and claimed invention appears to seek to decode
disparate or diverse types of audio coded information into a
common audio digitized format for later coding and outputting.
This is essentially what Bergher does. Similarly, the same may
be said of Farhangi and the explicit aim of Alexander, as well,
for example. The Abstract and Summary at column 1 of Alexander
makes it clear that not only are digital sources of data of
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007