Ex Parte Krishnamachari - Page 4




          Appeal No. 2004-0930                                                        
          Application No. 09/934,962                                                  


          to Sato’s blocks).  Sato’s image is characterized by the index              
          table (col. 26, lines 16-18; figure 45).  Each color Ci in that             
          table merely represents the portion of the hue axis in the                  
          histogram from di-1 to di+1 (figure 43).  For all di-1 to di+1              
          portions having a number of pixels which exceeds a threshold                
          value, the image and block numbers are shown in the index table             
          (col. 26, lines 5-10).  Thus, a Ci value in the index table for             
          which there are image and block numbers indicates that the amount           
          of the color Ci in the block is above the threshold value, but              
          does not indicate the degree to which the amount of color exceeds           
          the threshold value.  Hence, the color measures Ci in Sato’s                
          index table are not proportional to the frequencies of occurrence           
          of the colors.                                                              
               For the above reasons we find that the examiner has not                
          carried the burden of establishing a prima facie case of                    
          anticipation by Sato of the invention claimed in the appellant’s            
          claims 1-5 and 11-15.  We therefore reverse the rejection of                
          those claims.                                                               
                                Claims 6-10 and 16-20                                 
               The appellant states that claims 6-10 and 16-20 stand or               
          fall together (brief, page 3).  We therefore limit our discussion           
          to one of these claims, i.e., claim 6.  See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d           

                                          4                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007