Appeal No. 2004-0422
Application No. 09/046,315
V. Whether the Rejection of Claim 13 Under 35 U.S.C. § 102
is proper?
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us,
that the disclosure of Saito does not fully meet the invention as
recited in claim 13. Accordingly, we reverse.
With respect to independent claim 13, Appellants present the
same argument as above with respect to claim 5 and the Liou
reference. Here we find the argument fully persuasive as claim
13 does recite "DV data." We agree with Appellants that DV is a
specific standard in the art and that Saito does not teach this
standard.
Therefore, we will not sustain the Examiner's rejection
under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Conclusion
In view of the foregoing discussion, we have not sustained
the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112 of claim 5; we have sustained
the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 5-12; and we have
not sustained the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claim 13.
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007