Ex Parte Kaminkow - Page 2



          Appeal No. 2004-1254                                                        
          Application No. 09/625,884                                                  

               a video screen having a plurality of images and a plurality            
          of positions for the plurality of images;                                   
               at least one triggering event; and                                     
               means for repeatedly repositioning the plurality of images             
          as a unit in a coordinated manner to at least two of the                    
          positions to simulate movement of the entire video screen upon              
          the occurrence of a triggering event.                                       
                                    THE PRIOR ART                                     
               The references relied on by the examiner to support the                
          final rejection are:                                                        
          Ugawa                        5,836,819            Nov. 17, 1998             
          Bridgeman et al.             5,984,779            Nov. 16, 1999             
          (Bridgeman)                                                                 
          Fey, Marshall; Slot Machines, A Pictorial History of the First              
          100 Years, Fifth Edition; page 79 (Liberty Belle Books 1997)                
                                   THE REJECTIONS                                     
               Claims 1 through 5, 7 through 20, 22 and 23 stand rejected             
          under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fey in view             
          of Ugawa.                                                                   
               Claims 24 through 27 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)           
          as being unpatentable over Fey in view of Ugawa and Bridgeman.              
               Attention is directed to the main and reply briefs (Paper              
          Nos. 21 and 23) and to the final rejection and answer (Paper Nos.           
          13 and 22) for the respective positions of the appellants and the           
          examiner regarding the merits of these rejections.                          

                                          2                                           



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

Last modified: November 3, 2007