Appeal No. 2004-0204
Application No. 09/231,128
Thus, we will sustain the rejection of claims 1, 2, 10, 18 and 19 under 35 U.S.C.
§103.
Finally, with regard to claims 1, 2, 14, 18 and 19 and their rejection under 35
U.S.C. §103 over Hirokawa and Hasegawa, we will also sustain this rejection since
appellant again argues no suggestion of detecting errors in the video content while we
have decided, supra, that Hasegawa already discloses this broadly claimed limitation.
Since we find none of appellant’s arguments persuasive of patentability, we have
sustained the rejection of claims 1 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. §102 (e) and the rejection of
claims 1-3, 7-11, 14, 16 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. §103.
The examiner’s decision is, accordingly, affirmed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007