Ex parte BELLEGARDA et al. - Page 1




             The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
                    for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.        
                                                                 Paper No. 25         
                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                      
                                     ____________                                     
                          BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                          
                                   AND INTERFERENCES                                  
                                     ____________                                     
                            Ex parte JEROME R. BELLEGARDA                             
                                 and DIMITRI KANEVSKY                                 
                                     ____________                                     
                                 Appeal No. 1995-3030                                 
                              Application No. 08/073,091                              
                                     ____________                                     
                                       ON BRIEF                                       
                                     ____________                                     
          Before JERRY SMITH, FLEMING, and BARRY, Administrative Patent               
          Judges.                                                                     
          BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                         


                                  DECISION ON APPEAL                                  
               This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from                
          the  rejection of claims 44-89.  We reverse.                                


                                     BACKGROUND                                       
               The invention at issue in this appeal relates to message               
          recognition.  A user's speech is converted to a first signal;               
          his handwriting is converted to a second signal.  The first                 
          and second signals are processed to decode a consistent                     






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

Last modified: November 3, 2007