Appeal No. 96-3561
Application No. 08/045,241
processing system and each memory can be thought of as having
a plurality of regions for storing various information.
Appellants do not address this issue and, accordingly, we will
find for the examiner and sustain the examiner’s rejection of
claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103.
With regard to claim 19, the examiner contends that
Hayden teaches a key means (30) for selecting an operation
function and a control means (10) for controlling graphic data
to be displayed on display (50). Appellants argue that Hayden
“fails to disclose or suggest the use of an external portable
memory means, such as IC card, as defined in claims 19-20"
[brief-page 9].
While Hayden certainly does not disclose a second,
external memory means, it would have been obvious to artisans
that memory may be provided to the system in many different
forms, including external memory cards, for enabling
optionally renewable information to be provided to the
processor.
We will sustain the rejection of claims 19 and 20 under
35 U.S.C. 103.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007