Appeal No. 2006-0830
Application No. 09/911,954
Appellant argues, taking claim 1 as exemplary, that Sobol does
not teach or suggest examining the color components of a pixel and
selectively applying a matrix to the color components (plural) to
create an output color component (singular). Instead, appellant
argues, Sobol appears to apply a matrix to either a single color
component or a single lightness coordinate value across a number of
pixels to produce a single value with improved contrast (principal
brief-page 8). In the reply brief, at pages 2-4, appellant
elucidates by providing a Figure 1, allegedly showing how Sobol
applies a filter to an array made up of a single color component
from each of several pixels, whereas the instant invention applies
a matrix to multiple color components of a single pixel.
We start our analysis with the language of the claim at issue.
“The name of the game is the claim”- quote from Giles Rich. In re
Hiniker, 150 F.3d 1362, 1369, 47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir.
1998).
Claim 1 calls for a “method of processing color image data.”
Surely, the image sharpening filter of Sobol, with its indication
of being applicable to “color” (column 4, lines 31-37) qualifies as
such a method.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007