Appeal No. 2006-1618
Application No. 10/046,797
with sides equal to the distance separating the respective points A and B at the
ends of the discontinuity [id.]. According to appellant, modifying Catros to
accommodate selection via a user interface is contrary to Catros' teachings and
therefore teaches away from such a combination [id.]. Moreover, appellant
argues that the examiner has provided no objective evidence that Catros suffers
from the problems that concern Luo, namely fully automatic image segmentation
[reply brief, page 9].
The examiner responds that Catros' width parameter D is part of a search
space that is determined automatically [answer, page 15]. The examiner further
notes that Luo discloses a search stripe with a width parameter that can be
limited by a user. The examiner also notes that Luo expressly provides a
motivation to combine the references, namely making image segmentation less
difficult [answer, page 15].
We will sustain the examiner's rejection of claim 24. We agree with the
examiner that Luo reasonably teaches enabling a user to specify both the width
and height of a search stripe for video segmentation. In our view, such a
teaching is reasonably combinable with Catros and Makram-Ebeid essentially for
the reasons stated by the examiner. Although the search space in Catros is a
square, the reference hardly teaches away from providing the ability for a user to
define the search space area as appellant alleges. “A reference may be said to
teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the reference, would be
discouraged from following the path set out in the reference, or would be led in a
24
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007