Appeal No. 96-3248 Application 08/022,347 which does not meet the recitation of claim 9. Finally, appellants argue that Nakano does not store the rear implication as two discrete terms for calculating a center of gravity as recited in claim 9 [brief, pages 6-7]. In the “Response to argument” section of the answer, the examiner does not directly address the first two arguments made by appellants, but the examiner does respond that Nakano teaches storing a memory word having two discrete terms for calculating center of gravity [answer, pages 5-6]. Appellants concede that Nakano stores front prepositions and rear implications separately, however, appellants again argue that Nakano does not store these values in the manner recited in claim 9 nor calculate center of gravity as specifically recited in the claims. We agree with the position of appellants for basically the same reasons put forth by them. We agree with appellants that the examiner has merely demonstrated that Nakano separately stores front prepositions and rear implications, but claim 9 requires more than this. Claim 9 recites that the membership functions of each logic variable of the front preposition of each rule be stored in a respective storage module. We agree with appellants that this claim recitation requires that there be a group of storage modules and 5Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007