Appeal No. 97-2886
Application 08/441,493
describes as "'drag' modes known on computer interfaces," along
with the teachings of the Cunningham patent, in formulating the
35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of appellant's claims on appeal.
Moreover, as noted by appellant in the reply brief (Paper No. 9),
the examiner in his "Response to Argument" section of the answer
(pages 4-10) also relies upon other prior art, such as the "file
Manager" applications in Windows, highlighting features in
Windows applications, Solitaire in Windows applications, and the
t.v. game shows "Jeopardy" and "Wheel of Fortune."
Rather than reiterate the examiner's understanding of the
above-noted rejection and the conflicting viewpoints advanced by
the examiner and appellant regarding the rejection, we make
reference to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 8, mailed June 10,
1996) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the rejection,
and to appellant's brief (Paper No. 7, filed May 14, 1996) and
reply brief (Paper No. 9, filed July 30, 1996) for appellant's
arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given
careful consideration to appellant's specification and claims, to
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007