Ex Parte BERRY et al - Page 8
Legal Research Home >
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences > 2001 > Ex Parte BERRY et al - Page 8
Appeal No. 1999-2607
user around, there is no suggestion that the two-dimensional
telephone interface, once opened, lets the user navigate away.
Accordingly, we find that Linnett does not disclose "user
interface means for navigating away from said selected virtual
object within said three-dimensional workspace, and means for
user interactive input to said displayed two-dimensional image,
said input means remaining interactive after the user has
navigated away from said selected virtual object," as recited in
claim 20 and corresponding limitations in claims 21 and 22.
Lynch does not cure the deficiencies of Linnett, as we will
show. The Examiner's statement of the rejection does not rely on
Lynch for anything more than a teaching of a "two-dimensional
image of said virtual object," which limitation is not at issue.
Nevertheless, some of the Examiner's remarks rely on Lynch and we
discuss Lynch and the Examiner's remarks here.
Appellants argue that Lynch relates to navigation in only a
two-dimensional display interface having three distinct
two-dimensional levels or layers and, thus, does not relate to
navigation on a single level three-dimensional workspace (Br6-7).
The Examiner states that the levels are part of one workspace,
but, in any case, the room level constitutes a single workspace.
- 8 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Last modified: November 3, 2007