Appeal No. 2004-0557
Application No. 08/829,187
the value 0, and thus, when K = 0 the signals that arrive at the
adder 25 are not noise-reduced. Appellants (Brief, pages 10-11)
respond that regardless of the value that the coefficient K
takes, the limitations of Claim 1 are not present in Amano. We
agree.
Under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), a reference must disclose,
explicitly or implicitly, every limitation of the claimed
invention. Glaxo Inc. V. Novopharm Ltd., 52 F.3d 1043, 1047, 34
USPQ 2d 1565, 1567 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 988
(1995). We find that, regardless of what value K takes, Amano
does not implicitly or explicitly disclose a noise reduction
system as recited in Claim 1, namely, a noise reduction system
where the random noise is reduced by "combining a non-noise-
reduced image signal previously stored in said frame memory ...
with a non-noise-reduced current image signal ... to form a
noise-reduced image signal." The two possible scenarios are 1) if
K = 0, or 2) if K … 0. See infra for an explanation of why
neither scenario satisfies the limitations of independent claim
1.
1) If K = 0
If K = 0, we find that the signal which was previously
stored in the frame memory 27 has to be multiplied by 0 (i.e., K)
in multiplier 26 before it arrives at adder 25, and the current
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007