Appeal No. 1999-0081
Application No. 08/506,645
an accurate reflection of the function of the shift key in
relationship to the operation of the mouse at page 15 of
SUPERPAINT. The examiner’s views with respect to the claims
on appeal is only partially correct in that claim 5 does not
contain corresponding language quoted from claim 1 as argued
by the
examiner. As noted earlier, claim 5 requires that the picture
processing means convert one-dimensional information into
range data of the input video signals. This feature
distinguishes over the teaching argued by the examiner in the
context of the recitation in claim 1 on appeal because it is
clear to us that
there is no conversion of anything by the actuation of shift
key in the context of the joint action with respect to the
mouse as taught at page 15 of SUPERPAINT. The shift key does
not convert or cause to be converted, one type of information
into another type of information as the claim requires, and
the examiner does not directly address this limitation in this
claim. As such, we must reverse the rejection of independent
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007