Appeal No. 95-5009
Application 08/162,367
signals representing images of the document contents until a
match is found.
The Examiner’s Answer cites the following prior art:
Kato 4,574,395 Mar. 4, 1986
Fujisawa et al. (Fujisawa) 4,985,863 Jan. 15, 1991
OPINION
Claims 11-17, 19-57 and 59-86 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by Fujisawa. Claims 18 and 58 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Fujisawa in
view of Kato.
We reverse for the reasons given by Appellants
amplified as follows. The claims all require establishing a
“font table”, using the font table to construct an image signal
of a selected search word, and comparing that image signal to
“signals forming an image” of scanned and stored documents.
Claims undergoing examination are given their broadest
reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and
limitations appearing in the specification are not to be read
into the claims. In re Etter, 756 F.2d 852, 858, 225 USPQ 1, 5
(Fed. Cir. 1985) (in banc). In the present case, the meaning of
“font table” and “signals forming an image” must be considered in
light of the specification.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007