Appeal No. 2003-2092
Application 09/046,285
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 Zdepski and Tsukagoshi fail to
disclose or suggest for each of at least some of the video
blocks, accumulating a sum of the number of bits in the varying
bits coefficients encoded from the block and output from the
encoder, comparing the sum to a predefined block limit value and
terminating the outputting of the varying bit coefficients
encoded from the block to prevent the accumulated sum from
exceeding the predefined block limit as recited in Appellants’
independent claims 1 and 6. See page 4 of Appellants’ brief and
reply brief. The Examiner states that these limitations are
found in Zdepski in column 7, lines 7 through 12. See pages 4
and 5 of the Examiner’s answer.
We note that Appellants’ claim 1 recites:
A method for encoding digital video picture data,
comprising the steps of: . . . terminating the outputting of
the varying bit coefficients encoded from the block to
prevent the accumulated sum from exceeding the predefined
block limit value, and if all of the coefficients encoded
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007