Appeal No. 2003-2103 Page 5
Application No. 09/826,256
appeal, with claims 2 and 4-8 standing or falling therewith. See In re Young, 927 F.2d
588, 590, 18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991); In re Wood, 582 F.2d 638, 642, 199
USPQ 137, 140 (CCPA 1978). Representative claim 1 reads as follows:
1. An x-ray examination apparatus comprising
an x-ray image sensor matrix for deriving an initial
image signal[2] from a predetermined calibrated x-ray
exposure, and an initial image signal from an x-ray image,
and
a correction unit for deriving a corrected image signal
from the initial image signal, wherein the correction unit
includes a memory for storing correction values derived from
the calibration image signal and an arithmetic unit for
computing signal levels of the corrected image signal from
signal levels of the initial image signal and at least some of
said correction values in order to take delayed charges into
consideration during correction.
The objective of the Bruijns apparatus is to address the drawback of
conventional image pick-up apparatus that, even when the optical image has a uniform
brightness, image lines from different image sensors may have different brightness
values in the composite image because differences occur between signal levels of sub-
image signals even though they relate to brightness values from substantially the same
positions on the exit window. According to Bruijns, these differences may be due inter
alia to the fact that individual image sensors receive light from the exit window via
different optical paths or to different sensitivities of the individual brightness sensors.
2 This occurrence of “initial image signal” should apparently be “calibration image signal” and we
have treated it as such in interpreting claim 1.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007