Appeal No. 2006-1054
Application No. 09/739,619
input signal output from a microphone.” Appellants’ disclosed invention includes, inter
alia, a comparator that determines whether the phone is in use or not by comparing the
signal levels of the voice signal with the signal level of a reference signal. (Spec. at 10,
ll. 9-15; Fig. 4.)
According to the statement of the rejection, Ota discloses automatic voice dial
telephone terminal equipment that determines whether the phone is in use or not
according to a voice input signal output from a microphone. The rejection refers to the
(JPO) Abstract of Ota. (Answer at 4.)
According to Abstract of Ota, the system relates to a voice recognition system for
automatic dialing of a telephone number. The system recognizes the spoken name of a
party who is to be called. The telephone number of the party is displayed; the party’s
name may also be displayed. The user may then depress a key to dial the party’s
number.
We do not find any teaching with respect to whether the phone is in use or not
according to a voice input signal output from a microphone, in the Abstract or in the full
English translation of Ota. We do not see how the teachings of Ota might apply to
Hiroaki’s system, except perhaps to suggest using voice recognition and automatic
dialing with the video communication terminal disclosed by Ota. We agree with
appellants that a prima facie case for obviousness has not been set forth for the subject
matter of claims 3, 12, and 18.
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007