Appeal No. 96-1904
Application 08/164,854
A review of the applied teachings indicates to us
that, in particular, the noted limitation in claim 1 is not
fairly readable thereon. McCall teaches a split keyboard
(Figure 1) supported in use on a stand S. The splittable
keyboard of Lahr (Figure 3) is supported in use upon a track
40. The left and right keypads of Rader (Figures 1 and 2) are
indicated to be supported in use on a desktop or on the
armrests of a chair. Goldstein reveals a keyboard divided into
segments that is
supported on a desk. These teachings simply do not teach a
handheld or user held computer keyboard that is operated
“independently of supporting surfaces,” as claimed. Thus,
claim 1 is not anticipated by these respective prior art
teachings.
We turn now to claim 20. This claim broadly recites
a keyboard having keys (at least two keys) that serve a
multiple purpose as “alphabetic keys” and “numeric keys.”
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007