Appeal No. 96-1534
Application 07/888,991
The examiner has made an effort to read claim 28 on the
disclosure of Li [answer, pages 6-8], a procedure which we highly
recommend. Notwithstanding the examiner’s assertion of how Li
anticipates all the limitations of claim 28, appellants argue
that Li fails to disclose any of the steps recited in substeps
(b)(1)- (b)(3) [reply brief, pages 11-14]. We find ourselves in
agreement with appellants.
Appellants correctly point out that Li has nothing to do
with the manner in which records are accessed after a query has
been made. Li simply relates to a graphical interface which
assists the user in visualizing how a range of values of a record
field relates to the total range of values of that field. The
user can visualize the range between two values of a field, but
Li does not indicate how the records are to be accessed once the
query has been set by the user. Thus, Li cannot anticipate the
accessing steps recited in claim 28.
We also note that the examiner has determined that
substeps (b)(1) and (b)(2) are always possible within Li, and
since the selection is effectively an OR condition, claim 28 is
thereby satisfied [answer, page 7]. This rejection was made
before the claim was amended to read “any one of,” and, as noted
above, the examiner has not addressed the significance of this
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007