The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for
publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________
Ex parte NEVENKA DIMITROVA, LALITHA AGNIHOTRI
and THOMAS FRANCIS MCGEE III
__________
Appeal No. 2006-1591
Application No. 09/866,394
___________
ON BRIEF
___________
Before HAIRSTON, KRASS, and BLANKENSHIP, Administrative Patent Judges.
HAIRSTON, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal from the final rejection of claims 1 through 5, 7 through 15, 17 through
24, 26 through 33 and 35 through 38.1
The disclosed invention relates to a method and system for creating visual summaries of
video material. The method and system receive keyframes of video material, and extract frame
signatures from the keyframes. Superhistograms are then created from the frame signatures.
The frame signatures and the superhistograms are thereafter used to select representative
1 Claims 17 and 35 erroneously depend from canceled claims 16 and 34, respectively.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007