Appeal No. 2003-0434
Application No. 09/277,954
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will reverse the anticipation rejection of claims 1
through 8, and the obviousness rejection of claims 9 and 10.
Turning first to the anticipation rejection, Nozaki
discloses (Figures 1 and 2) a character recognition system that
includes a reading memory (i.e., memory 13), a working memory
(i.e., main memory 3), an entry device (i.e., digitizer 11) and a
recognition device (i.e., character recognition section 21).
Nozaki stores a dataset of memory character sequences in the
reading memory, and transfers the character sequences from the
reading memory into the working memory (column 4, lines 17
through 20).
According to the examiner (answer, pages 3, 4, 7 and 8),
Nozaki transfers the character sequences in a serial manner from
the reading memory to the working memory, and causes the
character recognition device to receive the possible linking of a
character sequence before the transfer of the entire dataset is
completed to the working memory.
Appellants argue (brief, page 10; reply brief, page 4) that
there is no mention in Nozaki of how the transfer of the data
from the reading memory 13 to the working memory 3 is carried
out. We agree with appellants’ argument. Nozaki merely states
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007