Appeal No. 97-0642
Application 08/242,318
allows the user to display and select from that list. The top
ranked candidate word can be designated to replace the
selected text. Thus, Capps discloses the ranking and
designation limitations of claim 7. Capps allows the selected
text string on the screen to be corrected using a correction
gesture and a menu of candidate text strings as recited in
claims 8 and 9. It would have been obvious to apply the
correction technique of Capps to the pen-based computer of
Sklarew because both deal with handwriting recognition in a
pen-based computer. The combination of Sklarew, Kato, and
Capps establishes a prima facie case of obviousness with
respect to claims 8 and 9 and 16-18.
Appellant argues that in Capps "both the handwritten text
and the listed candidates for recognition are from the same
text domain" (Br18). We conclude that handwriting symbols and
computer font symbols are broadly from different "text
domains," as discussed in connection with claim 1. Hence, we
conclude that Appellant has failed to rebut the prima facie
- 21 -
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007