Appeal No. 2001-0860
Application No. 08/772,047
vendors offer in the field of speech recognition and lists “an
intended result from using the product,” the reference “fails to
explain how the results are obtained” (brief, pages 4 & 5).
Additionally, Appellants argue that OODLL merely teaches that
users can use a linker to bind DLL’s name into a program as long
as the DLL has the right name and exports the right set of
function (brief, page 5). Appellants further assert that the
claimed enabling an existing object-oriented application program
with speech capability by replacing an input component of the
application program is not taught or suggested by the combination
of the applied prior art (brief, page 6).
In response to Appellants’ arguments, the Examiner asserts
that Speech provides for “adding code to an existing code without
the need to recompile” and teaches speech recognition by
attaching a speech input feature to an existing application in
combination with the Dynamic Link Library technology of OODLL
(answer, page 7). The Examiner further reasons that since “the
use of DLL is an old and well known way for adding software to
existing programs at load or runtime without needing to
recompile,” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
in the art to include the use of DLL with the speech recognition
capabilities taught by Speech (answer, page 9).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007