Appeal No. 2003-0193
Application 09/306,469
(i) executing at least one instruction from said first
voice command file.[1]
THE REFERENCES
Brais et al. (Brais) 5,995,936 Nov. 30, 1999
(filed Feb. 4, 1997)
Ackley et al. (Ackley) 6,199,044 Mar. 6, 2001
(filed May 27, 1998)
THE REJECTIONS
The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as follows:
claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 12, 13, 16, 21, 29 and 30 over Brais in view
of Ackley, and claims 3, 4, 7-11, 14, 15, 17-20, 22-28 and 31-38
over Brais in view of Ackley and well-known prior art.
OPINION
We reverse the aforementioned rejections. We need to
address only the independent claims, i.e., claims 1, 21 and 30.
Claim 1
1 The appellant should consider whether the specification
provides adequate written descriptive support under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph, for “sending said voice macro command
file to said capture device” and “accessing, within said capture
device, at least one command number from said voice macro command
file” in claim 1. The specification discloses (page 12,
lines 23-26), in the alternative, accessing a command number from
voice command recognition table 126 for a stand alone unit
(having no host processor; page 3, lines 23-26) or, for a
connected unit, i.e., one having a host processor, which is the
claimed embodiment, accessing a command number from voice command
recognition table 222 which is part of host processing system 200
(figure 2), not part of capture device 100 (figure 1).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007