Ex Parte MAUROMMATI et al - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2002-0556                                                        
          Application No. 09/177,960                                                  

               Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads         
          as follows:                                                                 
          1.  An information processing system comprising:                            
               a display,                                                             
               processing means, arranged for displaying in a first field on          
          the display a first sequence of first icons in a timed loop and             
          repeatedly making the currently displayed first icon selectable,            
          and                                                                         
               selecting means, arranged for selecting the selectable first           
          icon, characterised in that                                                 
               the processing means are arranged for displaying, upon                 
          selection of the selectable first icon, in a second field on the            
          display a second sequence of second icons in a timed loop and for           
          repeatedly making the currently displayed second icon selectable,           
          and                                                                         
               that the selecting means are arranged for selecting the                
          selectable second icon.                                                     
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Steele et al. (Steele)        5,742,779           Apr. 21, 1998             
          “Dynamic Icon Presentation,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin,             
          Vol. 35, No. 4B, Sept. 1992, pages 227 through 232 (hereinafter IBM         
          TDB).                                                                       
               Claims 1 through 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as         
          being unpatentable over Steele in view of the IBM TDB.                      
               Reference is made to the brief (paper number 11) and the               
          answer (paper number 12) for the respective positions of the                
          appellants and the examiner.                                                

                                          2                                           




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007