Appeal No. 1999-0437
Application 08/627,249
of distortion to an output-based speech analysis system
[column 1, line 60 to column 2, line 20]. Thus, the examiner
has taken one feature from Hollier’s background (the output-
based system) and combined it with a feature from Hollier’s
input-based speech analysis system (the plural measures of
distortion). Since the output-based system and the input-
based system are not disclosed by Hollier to be simultaneously
useable, there is no disclosure of combining the plurality of
distortion measurements used in Hollier’s input-based
invention with the output-based system of the prior art. The
examiner has, therefore, combined two unrelated features of
the Hollier disclosure to arrive at the claimed invention.
Since Hollier does not disclose the combined features
of an output-based speech analysis system and the use of a
plurality of distortions in a single embodiment, the
disclosure of Hollier does not fully meet the invention of
claims 1, 10 and 19 as required under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Therefore, we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection of
claims 1, 10 and 19 as anticipated by Hollier.
We now consider the various rejections made by the
examiner under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Appellants argue that these
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007