Appeal No. 2006-1020
Application No. 09/899,066
path of a camera lens (Answer at page 23). Appellant’s
argument that “hundreds of thousands of camera references
employ filters” is beyond the scope of the inquiry. We
find that both of the cited references are in the same
field of applicant’s endeavor and are reasonably pertinent
to the particular problem with which the applicant was
concerned, namely, insertion and removal of optical filters
from the optical path of a CCD camera for the purpose of
improving picture quality, for example, to prevent picture
quality deterioration or adjust lens sensitivity in view of
changing light intensity.
We further note that appellant merely argues the
references individually. Appellant argues that Beis does
not disclose or suggest use of a zoom lens system or a zoom
lens system with autofocus or a system that uses a neutral
density filter that upsets autofocus (Brief at page 17) and
that Beis indicates no focus error upon insertion or
removal of filters from an optical path (Brief at page 19).
Appellant further argues that Chino fails to disclose or
suggest a surveillance camera system, a fixed focus lens,
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007