Appeal No. 2003-2031
Application 09/225,193
An obviousness analysis commences with a review and
consideration of all the pertinent evidence and arguments. “In
reviewing the [E]xaminer’s decision on appeal, the Board must
necessarily weigh all of the evidence and argument.”
In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d at 1445, 24 USPQ2d at 1444. “[T]he Board
must not only assure that the requisite findings are made, based
on evidence of record, but must also explain the reasoning by
which the findings are deemed to support the agency’s
conclusion.” In re Lee, 277 F.3d 1338, 1344, 61 USPQ2d 1430,
1434 (Fed. Cir. 2002). With these principles in mind, we
commence review of the pertinent evidence and arguments of
Appellants and Examiner.
Appellants argue that Linzer and Lee individually, and in
combination, fail to teach, suggest or imply adapting the
encoding of multiple streams and parallel, with encode bit rate
of one or more of the streams being constant within GOP and
variable between GOPs based on relative changes in the intraframe
and/or interframe characteristic as recited in Appellants’
claims. See pages 8 through 10 of the Appellants’ brief.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007