Court Opinions
State Laws
|
Ex Parte CAPPS et al - Page 6
Legal Research Home >
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences > 2003 > Ex Parte CAPPS et al - Page 6
Appeal No. 2002-1041
Application 08/866,402
Obviousness
Initially, it is noted that only claim 24 recites a touch
screen display, so Greanias is only relevant to claim 24. The
"position sensing subsystem for providing signals indicating that
an area on the display has been selected by an operator" in
claims 20, 26, and 31 reads on the ordinary computer subsystem
for sensing the position of a cursor or pointer which is clearly
present in Volk. The analysis is limited to Volk except for the
rejection of claim 24.
Claim 20
The argued differences are altering the visual
representation of the selected key "by enlarging said the visual
representation and by changing said visual representation to have
the appearance of a depressed key."
Appellants argue that the examiner relies on a general
language in Volk suggesting that a programmer can enable any
change of appearance that the programmer chooses, but this does
not teach the precise changes in display that are claimed
(Br10-11). We agree that the rejection, as stated, seems to rely
on general language in Volk and is not persuasive for that
reason. Nevertheless, Volk does have specific relevant teachings
which cannot be ignored. For example, the examiner did refer to
Fig. 8A in the rejection (Paper No. 13) and the final rejection
- 6 -
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: November 3, 2007
|
|
