Appeal No. 2005-0319
Application No. 09/946,874
We disagree with the examiner. Independent claim 8 includes the limitations
“determining a location, within the first color cube, of the first color” and “mapping the
first color index to one or more additional first color cube entries based on a distance
of the color region defined by the one or more additional first color cube entries to
the location.” Independent claims 22 and 36 include similar limitations. Thus, the
scope of independent claims 8, 22 and 36 includes mapping a color index based
upon a distance to the location from a first color within the color cube. We find that
Berlin teaches, in column 2, lines 23 –37, that an error value is calculated using the
distance between two RGB color values. The error value is used to dither the
colors. While we agree with the examiner that this error value is a distance
measurement, we do not find that Berlin teaches using the distance from a location
to map a color index to a color cube entry. Accordingly, we will not sustain the
examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of independent claims 8, 22 and 36 or
dependent claims 9, 14, 23, 28, 37 or 42.
We next consider the rejection of claims 10 through 13, 24 through 27 and 38
through 41 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over Berlin and Stokes. Claims 10
through 13, 24 through 27 and 38 through 41 all ultimately depend upon either claim
8, 22 or 36. The examiner states, on page 11 of the answer,“[I]t is unclear whether
Berlin teaches drawing a sphere for color representation. However, Stokes
discloses the claimed limitation of drawing a sphere for color representation (Stokes
column 4, lines 30-36 and figure1).” As stated supra with respect to independent
claims 8, 22 and 36, we do not find that Berlin teaches using the distance from a
location to map a color index to a color cube entry as claimed. The examiner has
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007