Appeal No. 1997-0200
Application No. 08/202,860
said plurality of different characteristics from said
identifying step was identified;
ranking each of said suspect items to indicate the
relative likelihood that each of said suspect items is the
source of the error, wherein the relative likelihood of a
suspect item being the source of the error is determined by a
characteristic exhibited by said suspect item and said one of
said plurality of weights associated with said characteristic;
reentering the amounts for the items in the out-of-
balance transaction until the transaction balances, wherein
said reentering step begins with said suspect item which is
the most likely source of the error and progresses toward the
item which is the least likely source of error; and
checking whether the transaction is balanced after each
amount is reentered, whereby said reentering step is completed
upon detection of the transaction being balanced.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Elischer et al. (Elischer) 5,040,226 Aug. 13,
1991
Lyke et al. (Lyke) 5,151,948 Sep. 29,
1992
Claims 28, 33, 37, and 38 stand finally rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Lyke in view of
Elischer.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the
Examiner, reference is made to the Brief and Answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007