Ex parte JORDAN - Page 3




                     Appeal No. 1997-2700                                                                                                                                              
                     Application 08/307,249                                                                                                                                            


                     caller fails to match the voice signature of said authentic                                                                                                       
                     caller so that said verification means can take into                                                                                                              
                     consideration said risk factor in determining whether said                                                                                                        
                     call is from said authentic caller.                                                                                                                               




                               The Examiner relies on the following prior art:                                                                                                        
                     Hou et al. (Hou)                                                 5,325,421                                            Jun. 28,                                    
                     1994                                                                                                                                                              
                     Johnson et al. (Johnson)                                                   5,345,595                                                                              
                     Sep. 06, 1994                                                                                                                                                     
                     Hunt et al. (Hunt)                                               5,365,574                                            Nov. 15,                                    
                     1994                                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                           (Filed Nov. 25, 1992)                                                       
                                Claims 1-3, 8-13, 18-20, and 24 stand rejected under 35                                                                                                
                     U.S.C.  102(e) as being anticipated by Hunt.  Claims 4-6, 14-                                                                                                    
                     16, 21, and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being                                                                                                      
                     unpatentable over Hunt in view of Hou.  Claims 7, 17, and 23                                                                                                      
                     stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable                                                                                                        
                     over                                                                                                                                                              
                     Hunt in view of Johnson.                                                                                                                                          
                                Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellant and the                                                                                               
                     Examiner, reference is made to the Briefs  and Answers for the                          1                                                                         

                                1 The Appeal Brief (revised) was filed July 24, 1996.  In                                                                                              
                     response to the Examiner’s Answer dated September 25, 1996, a                                                                                                     
                     Reply Brief was filed November 15, 1996.  The Examiner entered                                                                                                    
                                                                                          3                                                                                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007