Appeal No. 1997-0920
Application 08/274,123
where the exact location must be known. We find that
Dickinson does not disclose the claimed "ii) text symbol
sequence information" but, nevertheless, address the other
limitations.
The textual block identifier in Dickinson has no
information associated with it that corresponds to the
"(iii) query symbol sequence information." The textual block
identifier just indicates the document number and paragraph
number where one or more query words is found. It does not
even identify what query word in found at that block; there
has to be a table (Table 4) to correlate the query words (or
their equivalents) to a textual block identifier. Appellant
argues this limitation (Br6), but the Examiner does not
respond. Thus, we further find that Dickinson does not
disclose the claimed "(iii) query symbol sequence information"
and does not anticipate.
The Examiner finds the claimed "match token sorter" to
correspond to the sort operation in Dickinson where each
textual block identifier is assigned a score depending on the
number of sets of equivalent words which have at least one
equivalent word in the text block.
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007