Appeal 2007-0563
Application 10/001,940
1 arguments regarding the incompatibility of Iwamura z buffering with
2 Montgomery’s item buffering is without merit.
3 Likewise, Applicants’ argument that Montgomery’s item buffer
4 cannot be used for Iwamura’s three-dimensional scene is not persuasive. As
5 pointed out by the Examiner, and supported by the record, one of ordinary
6 skill in the art knew how to use item buffering for pick handling in a three
7 dimensional environment (FF 12). The Applicants are silent with respect to
8 the Examiner’s findings in that respect and have therefore failed to
9 demonstrate that the Examiner’s findings are erroneous.
10 Applicants urge the Board to consider additional evidence obtained
11 from two separate web sites regarding z-buffering (Br. “EVIDENCE
12 APPENDIX”). The evidence is in the form of two printout copies from two
13 different websites. Both copies are dated “4/3/2006.” That date is
14 subsequent to the 29 November 2001 filing date of the involved application
15 by over four years. Yet, the Applicants are silent as to whether the
16 information was known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
17 invention. For this reason, we give no weight to the additional evidence. In
18 any event, the additional evidence does not help the Applicants. The
19 Applicants have failed to sufficiently demonstrate that Iwamura only
20 contemplates z buffering or that one of ordinary skill in the art would not
21 know how to use item buffering for three dimensional graphics as already
22 explained. For reasons already articulated, Applicants arguments are not
23 persuasive and the additional evidence does not alter that view.
14
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013