Appeal No. 2002-1995
Application No. 09/071,488
It is appellants’ position that the examiner is arguing that
there is a missing element in Michel “(a handheld apparatus that
can be grasped by a single hand of a user, that has navigational
input tools integrated within the housing with the computer
display, and that has navigational input tools which are
positioned for operation by one or more fingers of the user’s
single hand such that the user’s single hand can simultaneously
grasp the housing and operate the navigational input tools to
navigate in computer program applications)” (principal brief-page
6) but since the reference does not prohibit this missing
element, it essentially shows the missing element. Appellants
state that “To assert that a reference shows a missing element by
indicating that the reference does not prohibit this element from
being carried out goes directly against the reason for having the
required teaching or suggestion requirement in the first place”
(principal brief-page 6).
We disagree. Figure 8 of Michel may show two hands holding
the device but artisans would have understood that one hand may
hold the device 32 of Figure 5b and simultaneously operate the
buttons on one side of the device, much like using two hands on a
steering wheel to steer a vehicle even though one hand on the
steering wheel is sufficient.
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007