Appeal No. 2002-0333
Application No. 09/127,713
We disagree.
We do agree with appellant that Wilz discloses the copying of a set of
parameters identically and, as such, would not particularly need a menu of user
selectable choices. However, Wilz is not limited to merely identically copying a set of
parameters, i.e., the “clone” mode. As indicated at column 15, lines 48-62, of Wilz, a
user selects functions “for either mastering or cloning a bar code symbol
scanner/reader.” Therefore, since a user selects functions when programming a master
(Function Programming Mode), Wilz does disclose an embodiment wherein user
selections are made, and not merely copied.
Accordingly, one may wish to provide a menu for the user in Wilz. Unfortunately,
for the examiner’s position, we find no suggestion of a display menu in Wilz nor has the
examiner established a convincing line of reasoning as to why the artisan would have
been led to provide such a display menu. While Wilz does mention MS-DOS, Microsoft
Windows, etc. and all of these systems, as stated by the examiner, “are known to contain
menu driven software,” there is no suggestion in Wilz of “establishing a display menu of
the parameterization commands and the parameter values” (claim 1) or “receiving a
number of scanner commands and scanner parameter values selected from a computer
display menu of commands and parameter values” (claim 12) or “generating a computer
interface menu of user selectable commands and parameter values” (claim 17) or
“selecting a number of symbol reader commands and symbol reader parameters from a
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007