Appeal No. 96-3561
Application No. 08/045,241
We fail to see anything which would have led the artisan
to make the combination sought by the examiner. As appellants
point out [brief-page 5], Shirai’s composing circuit composes
an image by combining background image data with character
data. While we do find that Hayden’s graphic data (relating
to the telephone) does represent an appearance of an
information processing device (the actual telephone), the icon
in Hayden is not formed by composing divided graphic data and
the image of Shirai is not formed from divided graphic data,
or from character information and graphic information, as
recited in instant claim 8. Therefore, it is not clear why
the skilled artisan would have combined the teachings of
Hayden and Shirai in order to form a composite image in Hayden
comprising character information from a second memory and
graphic data of a first memory. It is especially unclear what
would have led the artisan to make such a modification in
Hayden when Hayden is not concerned with composing an image
from divided graphic data.
Accordingly, we will not sustain the rejection of
independent claim 8, nor the rejection of claims 9 and 10
which depend therefrom, under 35 U.S.C. 103.
15
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007