Appeal No. 1998-2974
Application No. 08/524,106
telecommunication network. Therefore, we will not sustain the
rejection of claims 17, 19, and 21 over Darden, Hanle, and
Larkey.
As to claims 25 through 27, the examiner combines Rhee
with Darden. However, Rhee fails to cure the deficiency of
Darden noted above. In particular, Rhee discloses a multi-
media messaging system, not a voice recognition system which
outputs a plurality of approximations of an input signal.
Consequently, the examiner has failed to establish a prima
facie case of obviousness, and we cannot sustain the rejection
of claims 25 through 27.
The reversal of the rejection is based solely on the
record before us. Although we note the similarities between
Larkey’s method and the claimed steps, we decline to make a
new ground of rejection combining Larkey’s method with a
telecommunication network, since we find no evidence in the
record before us that would suggest the combination as recited
in the claims. There is no reason, in our judgement, as to
why it would have been obvious to combine Larkey with
Daudelin, PN 4,922,519, as proposed in the concurring
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007