Appeal 2007-0563
Application 10/001,940
1 7. The Examiner relied on Montgomery to teach “a color value
2 stored for each pixel in the display device,” as recited in claim 1 and
3 similarly in claim 37, and directs attention to Fig. 2 and the description of
4 that figure in Montgomery (Final Rejection 3 and Answer 3).
5 8. In response to the rejection, Applicants argued that “a color
6 value stored for each pixel in the display device” is recited in all of the
7 independent claims and that neither reference describes this feature (Br. 12).
8 9. In particular, Applicants argue that “a color value stored for each
9 pixel in the display device” means that there is a separate/respective color
10 value for each pixel in the display device and that: “not every pixel in the
11 Montgomery device is covered by an object, only objects within the display”
12 (Br. 13).
13
14 10. The Examiner responded and argued that:
15 Iwamura’s rendering is ideally-suited to carry forward into a
16 pick-testing scheme like Montgomery’s, where the pixel-by-
17 pixel colors are then read into the color-maintaining portion of
18 memory along with the parallel item buffer. (Emphasis by the
19 Examiner).
20
21 And that:
22
23 Iwamura produces a rendering of an entire scene, as bounded
24 by a rectangular border. All points within such a display should
25 be rendered and addressable by the pointing device. (Answer
26 8).
27
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013