Appeal No. 1998-0752
Application 08/389,096
normalization "makes all characters the same size" (column 5,
lines 58-59). Kao recognizes that "waveform amplitude is a
function of the ink signal strength" (column 3, lines 56-57).
Appellant admits at page 2 of the specification that many
problems may cause character reading devices to produce signal
defects. The person having ordinary skill in the art would
have recognized that Kao's suggestion to make all characters
the same "size" (i.e., amplitude) would solve the problem of
different documents producing signals of different amplitudes.
Therefore, we find that it would have been obvious to one
skilled in the art in view of the teachings of Toyama, Kao,
and AAPA to calculate the amplitude ratio value of each sample
of a set by dividing each sample magnitude by the average
magnitude, then generate a set of identifiers, then compare
each set of identifiers with predetermined sets of identifiers
to recognize a character being scanned, as recited in claim 9.
On pages 12 and 13 of the Brief, Appellant urges that
claims 11 and 12 are patentable for the reasons set forth in
support of the patentability of claims 3 and 4, respectively.
Appellant does not discuss the limitations of claim 9, from
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007