Appeal No. 1997-2700
Application 08/307,249
the alleged failure of Hunt’s call verification system to
disclose the risk factor feature present in each of
independent claims 1, 11, and 19. Appellant’s view is
summarized at page 4 of the Reply Brief as follows:
Putting it simply, the instant invention inputs
risk factor(s) into play only after a determination
has been made that the voice of the caller fails to
match the stored voice signature of the authentic
caller. This is in contrast to the Hunt system
in which the predetermined call condition is taken
into account to set up the thresholds before a
determination is made on whether the caller is an
authentic caller (emphasis in original).
After careful review of the Hunt reference in light of
the arguments of record, we are in agreement with the
Examiner’s position as stated in the Answers. We do agree
with Appellant that Hunt’s establishment of the threshold
“windows” for the acceptance criterion takes place prior to
call placement; however, this is not the feature that the
Examiner relies on for disclosing the claimed risk factor
limitations. In the Examiner’s interpretation of Hunt, with
which we agree, a risk factor is indeed introduced into Hunt’s
system after a determination that a voice print match does not
fall within an acceptance threshold. This risk factor takes
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007