Appeal 2007-1290
Application 09/861,548
Yamamoto's invention "to allow Yamamoto to select an indicator image
(any image … because Yamamoto's image indicates the vehicle's
surrounding, driving directions and window directions) based on Verbinski's
counting part such counting part can be incorporated in Yamamoto's display
control device … for determining the vehicle speed value based on the
vehicle speed signal."
Appellants contend (Reply Br. 12) that Yamamoto's vehicle does not
select which images to display based on the speed nor counting the
generations of the display image. Appellants contend (Reply Br. 12-13) that
Yamamoto merely selects whether or not to display a monitor image based
on the speed of the vehicle reaching a particular threshold. Appellants
contend (Br. 11-12) that Verbinski discloses counting photons rather than
generations of a display image that comprises an indicator image overlaid on
a surrounding image. Counting pixels is not the same as counting the
number of generations of the display image. Thus, the issue is whether the
claimed counting part (or step) counting the number of generations of the
display image would have been obvious in view of the teachings of
Yamamoto and Verbinski.
Yamamoto does not explicitly disclose a counting part. Yamamoto's
display of a monitor image when the vehicle speed reaches a particular
threshold does not suggest counting the number of times an indicator image
is overlaid on a surrounding image. Verbinski's counting pixel densities to
generate a display of the moving vehicle's contents does not equate to
counting the number of times an indicator image is overlaid on a
surrounding image. Since neither Yamamoto nor Verbinski suggests
counting the number of times an indicator image is overlaid on a
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013