Appeal No. 2002-0333
Application No. 09/127,713
The examiner relies on the following references:
Poland 4,825,058 Apr. 25, 1989
Wilz et al. (Wilz) 5,777,315 Jul. 07, 1998
(effective filing date Feb. 16, 1995)
Claims 1 and 3-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103. As evidence of
obviousness, the examiner cites Wilz with regard to all of the claims, adding Poland in
an additional rejection of claim 4.
Reference is made to the brief and answer for the respective positions of
appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
At the outset, we note that appellants group the claims into two distinct groups,
claims 1-16 and 21 forming one group and claims 17-20, 22 and 23 forming the other
group. The groups are argued separately and all the claims in each group stand or fall
together. However, we do note that appellants make a separate argument with regard
to claim 1 (e.g., brief-page 12). The first group of claims, as represented by claim 19, is
directed to a computer interface display menu of user selectable commands and
parameter values. The second group of claims, represented by claim 12, is directed, in
addition to the computer interface display menu, to a graphic or sequence of character
strings having a maximum length at the most equal to the length of the scanning range
of the symbol reader, where the graphic or sequence of character strings represents at
least two parameterization commands or values.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007