Appeal No. 1996-2480
Application 08/163,825
terms set forth on pages 3 through 5 of Appellants'
specification.
We note that all of Appellants' claims recite the
limitation of a perceptron node. We also note that the
Examiner
has failed to address this limitation as it is defined in
Appellants' specification. Upon our review of Weingard and
Lu, we fail to find that either of these references teaches
this limitation. Therefore, we will not sustain the
Examiner's
rejection of claims 1 through 16, 19 through 32 and 34 through
53 as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Weingard
in view of Lu.
We have not sustained the rejection of the claims
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Accordingly, the Examiner's decision
is reversed.
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007