Appeal 2006-3279
Application 10/039,668
Technology Center 2600
on a display device at a viewing station if the viewing conditions are not
satisfied at the viewing station as required by claim 53. However, we find
no such requirement in claim 53. The claim requires a folder of images and
an associated meta data file, adding a “wherein” clause that by its terms
appears to represent a mere intended use for the images and data (e.g., what
a viewing station may do with the data), which does not modify the original,
actual content of the data as it resides on the computer readable medium.
Appellant has not shown error in the Examiner’s finding that Holub (col. 25,
ll. 36-45) shows all that instant claim 53 requires.
CONCLUSION
In summary, we have sustained the § 102(e) rejection of claims 51
and 52. We have sustained the § 103(a) rejection of claims 41, 42, 44, 53,
and 69-72. We have not sustained the § 102(e) rejection of claims 1, 2, 7, 8,
19, 55-57, 59, and 60. Nor have we sustained the § 103(a) rejection of
claims 3-6, 9-18, 20-40, 43, 45-50, 54, 58, 61-68, 73, and 74. The
Examiner’s decision is thus affirmed-in-part.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
tdl/ce
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013