Appeal No. 1997-0200
Application No. 08/202,860
different digits to be a different type of error to which a
differing relative weight was assigned.
In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion
that, since all of the claim limitations would be met by the
Examiner’s well reasoned proposed combination of Lyke and
Elischer, the Examiner has established a prima facie case of
obviousness which remains unrebutted by any persuasive
arguments of Appellant. We remain convinced that, given
Elischer’s clear and unambiguous teaching of ranking suspect
items based on the relative weighting of the characteristics
of different types of error in a transaction balancing system,
the skilled artisan would have found it obvious to modify the
transaction balancing system of Lyke to include a statistical
weighting feature for ranking suspect items as taught by
Elischer. Further, it is our view that this obviousness would
extend, not only to the different types of error present in
character recognition discussed by both Lyke (e.g. column 7,
lines 1-4) and Elischer, but as well to other categories or
types of error such as transposition and misplaced items
specifically discussed by Lyke. Accordingly, the Examiner’s
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007