Appeal No. 2002-1982
Application No. 08/863,462
Turning now to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 4-9
and 13 over Hunt and Cameron, Appellant points out that neither
reference describes the “enrollment on the fly” feature (brief,
page 15). Appellant further argues that Cameron merely compares
each received word of a first utterance against a set of
templates (col. 1, lines 18-33) without showing any comparison
between the utterances (brief, page 16). The examiner responds
by referring to the fact that the saved templates are in fact
digits uttered by the user (col. 2, lines 20-23) and stored as
voice samples to which a second utterance is compared (answer,
page 9).
We agree with the Examiner that the voice templates are
actually formed by storing training utterances as uttered digits
or any other word by the user and are compared with any received
or second utterance for verification and generating scores as
“weighted decisions” (col. 2, lines 16-26). Therefore, the
Examiner’s reliance on Cameron for teaching a comparison between
separate utterances for establishing a password and the
corresponding codes and scores as the recited weighted decisions
and verification decision supports a prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to claim 13. However, regarding claims
4-9, we find that the Examiner has not pointed to any teachings
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007