Ex Parte Beit-Zuri et al - Page 1




            The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.

                       UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE                                              
                                                 ____________                                                 
                           BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS                                                 
                                         AND INTERFERENCES                                                    
                                               ____________                                                   
                           Ex parte Eli Beit-Zuri, James Berney, Martine Freiberger,                          
                              Pamela Thompson, and Michal Anne Quakenbush                                     
                                               ____________                                                   
                                            Appeal No. 2006-2177                                              
                                          Application No. 10/127,152                                          
                                               ____________                                                   
                                                 ON BRIEF                                                     
                                               ____________                                                   
            Before HAIRSTON, KRASS, and BARRY, Administrative Patent Judges.                                  
            BARRY, Administrative Patent Judge.                                                               


                   A patent examiner rejected claims 1-33.  The appellants appeal therefrom under             
            35 U.S.C. § 134(a).  We affirm.                                                                   


                                              I. BACKGROUND                                                   
                   The invention at issue on appeal concerns graphical user interfaces ("GUIs").              
            GUls allow users to interface with software applications operating on electronic devices.         
            Some GUIs include a list of selectable titles.  (Spec. at 1.)   Figure 1 of the appellants'       
            specification, for example, shows a GUI 100 for an application having more than                   
            eighteen available options.  Tabs for a first nine options fit across the screen; a second        
            row of tabs offers another nine options.  (Id.)                                                   






Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013