Appeal No. 95-4221 Page 4
Application No. 08/086,569
language model 1010. The other portion (8:53-54) specifically
addresses fenemic recognition to correct errors caused by
coarticulation. Although Appellants' claims do not exclude
fenemic recognition, fenemic recognition is distinct from
Appellants' claimed subject matter. Consequently, we do not
find Bahl to have anticipated any of the claims on appeal.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 4-8 under subsection 102(e) over
Bahl is
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
ERROL A. KRASS ) APPEALS
Administrative Patent Judge ) AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
RICHARD TORCZON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007