Appeal No. 95-4151
Application 08/158,342
because the term "virtual" means that the display is not an
actual display. The Examiner acknowledges that in the brief
the Appellants have argued that the term virtual display is
well recognized by those skilled in the art and is understood
to be a display in which the image to be viewed is a virtual
image. The Examiner argues that this argument should be
dismissed on page 3 of the answer because the Appellants have
not set forth in the claims how a virtual image can be
controlled by a virtual control panel.
On pages 2 and 3 of the reply brief, Appellants argue
that reading the claims as a whole and in light of the
specification the term "virtual display" would be clear and
concise to those skilled in the art. In particular,
Appellants argue that the term clearly claims an electronic
device and not a virtual image.
In view of the Appellants' arguments and in light of the
teaching of Appellants' disclosure as it would be interpreted
by one possessing ordinary skill in the art, we find that the
language "virtual display" sets out and circumscribes a
particular area with a reasonable degree of precision and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007