Appeal No. 1997-1665 Page 26
Application No. 08/289,134
Claims 14-17
The appellants make the following argument.
[T]he prior art combination asserted by the Examiner
fails to teach "a direction and a length of a
straight line of a line segment," (claim 14); "a
radius and a center angle of an arc," (claim 15); "an
angle of a vertex," (claim 16); and "a number of
loops defined by said handwriting," (claim 17) which
are extracted from a feature portion of coordinate
data representing handwritten input, which are then
compared to a data base of line directions and
lengths, radii and center angles of arcs, angles of
vertex, and numbers of loops in order to recognize
the handwritten input.
(Appeal Br. at 16.) Claim 14 specifies in pertinent part the
following limitations: "said set of one or more
characteristics of said input handwriting comprises a
direction and a length of a straight line of a line segment."
Claim 15 specifies in pertinent part the following
limitations: "said set of one or more characteristics of said
input handwriting comprises a radius and a center angle of an
arc." Claim 16 specifies in pertinent part the following
limitations: "said set of one or more characteristics of said
input handwriting comprises an angle of a vertex." Claim 17
specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: "said
set of one or more characteristics of said input handwriting
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007