Appeal No. 2000-1887
Application No. 08/853,075
OPINION
In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner relies on Horna for
disclosing an adaptive filter for generating an output signal as
a function of the input signal as well as a number of weighting
coefficients and an error detector for generating an error signal
as a function of the output signal (answer, pages 2 & 3). The
Examiner specifically points to figure 1 and column 1 lines 33-35
and 62-68 for teaching a processor that selectively modifies the
weighting coefficients in response to the error signal and
selectively allocates system resources for storing the weighting
coefficients (answer, page 3). However, the Examiner points out
the deficiencies of Horna and further relies on Sugiyama (col. 4,
lines 37-43) for showing that a processor increases or decreases
the number of the weighting coefficients in response to a
characteristics of the weighting coefficient used by the filter
(id.).
Appellant argues that Sugiyama merely redistributes taps
between sub-filters 60i of adaptive filter 60 based on tap
coefficients of each sub-filter instead of the claimed increasing
or decreasing the number of taps used by filter 60 based on “a
characteristic of the weighting coefficient used by adaptive
filter only and no other weighting coefficients” (brief, pages 5-
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007