Appeal No. 1997-3914
Application No. 08/384,457
rather the cluster spellings are not associated with any one
individual. (Brief-pages 4 and 5.) Appellant states:
In other words, in step (a) of claim 9, a
reference pattern is generated for each speaker. If
the number of existing speakers is, for example,
100, an independent reference pattern is separately
generated for each of the 100 speakers, indicating
that reference patterns being 100 in total are
generated. On the other hand, Gillick describes at
column 13 that sound data pieces uttered by many
speakers are subjected to clustering to generate a
single reference pattern. Thus, Gillick is totally
different from the present invention. (Brief-pages
5 and 6.)
During prosecution, the Patent and Trademark Office is
required to give claims their "broadest reasonable
interpretation", consistent with the specification. In re
Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027 (Fed. Cir.
1997). Appellant indicates that Gillick generates a single
reference pattern from many speakers. However, to do so, we
note, Gillick must first gather sound reference data from each
speaker. As stated in Gillick:
Once this is done, the clustering process shown
in FIG. 7 can take place. As is described in
greater detail in application Ser. No. 862,275, the
method of FIG. 7 concatenates each of the
corresponding node models 20A produced by different
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007