Appeal No. 2003-1858
Application No. 09/073,871
in response to said detected change over from one still
image to another, automatically synchronizing change over from
one still image to another with the audio recording.
The Examiner relies on the following references in rejecting
the claims:
Ellozy et al. (Ellozy) 5,649,060 Jul. 15, 1997
Shipp 6,031,526 Feb. 29, 2000
(filed Aug. 8, 1996)
Qureshi et al. (Qureshi) 6,084,582 Jul. 4, 2000
(filed Jul. 2, 1997)
Claims 51, 55 and 57-59 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shipp.
Claims 56, 60, 61 and 66-68 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shipp and Qureshi.
Claims 62-65 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Shipp, Qureshi and Ellozy.
We make reference to the answer (Paper No. 27, mailed
February 14, 2003) for the Examiner’s reasoning, and to the
appeal brief (Paper No. 26, filed November 22, 2002) for
Appellants’ arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
With respect to the rejection of claims 51, 55 and 57-59,
Appellants point out that, in contrast with the claimed detection
of change over from one still image to another during a live
presentation, Shipp provides for a physician to selectively
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007