Appeal No. 2005-1045
Application No. 09/225,574
discussion to one claim in each group, i.e., claims 38 and 39.
See In re Ochiai, 71 F.3d 1565, 1566 n.2, 37 USPQ2d 1127, 1129
n.2 (Fed. Cir. 1995); 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7)(1997).
Claim 38
Mann discloses a system and method for teaching a student a
physical skill, particularly golf, by overlaying, in a video
display, a model having the physical characteristics of the
student on an image of the student performing the physical skill
(col. 1, lines 10-17; col. 2, line 66 - col. 3, line 1; col. 3,
lines 29-31). The model is computer generated and includes the
composite average movements of a set of elite performers capable
of superior performance of the skill (col. 3, lines 37-43). The
student learns the physical skill by comparing the action of the
model to the image of the student and correcting the student’s
movement to coincide with the model’s movement (col. 3, lines 33-
37; col. 13, lines 39-62; col. 33, lines 35-37 and 55-56;
col. 34, lines 41-44 and 53-62; col. 35, lines 23-24).
The appellants argue that Mann uses a video recording of a
student performing an activity in the past, not in real time, and
2(...continued)
which its subject matter indicates it belongs.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007