Appeal No. 2003-1558
Application No. 09/464,841
Koizumi as reading on the claimed determination of proximity of a
user’s face to the camera, as well as the claimed “display data.”
We find the examiner’s analysis to be erroneous. The
“aspect ratio” of Koizumi is not a determination of the proximity
of a user’s face to a camera. Rather, it refers to changing
certain aspects of the virtual camera so as to provide close and
long range video conferencing scenarios (column 7, lines 32-35).
There is no determination of the proximity of a user’s face to
the camera in Koizumi, and there is clearly no such determination
based on first and second images.
With regard to providing display data, no “aspect ratio” is
displayed by Koizumi (though Koizumi may employ this “aspect
ratio” to determine what to display). Accordingly, the “aspect
ratio” of Koizumi cannot be the claimed “display data.”
In the answer, the examiner appears to alter his stance and
finds that the image displayed is the claimed “display data.” We
find this to also be in error because claim 2 requires the
“display data” to be provided “dependent upon the proximity of
the user’s face to the camera” and this proximity determination
is based on an analysis of first and second images. Clearly, the
claimed “display data” is something more than merely one of the
images provided by the camera. It would make no sense to analyze
-4–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007