Appeal 2007-0436
Application 10/125,620
We remain unconvinced by Appellant’s argument (Br. 7) that the
references “are directed to two different and opposite approaches” since the
distinction made by Appellant between the operating system and the GUI in
generating the error message is merely in the style of the user interface. In
that regard, the operating system controls the entire computer operation
including the GUI operation.
CONCLUSION
Thus, in light of these findings and since Appellant presents no
additional arguments related to any other claim, we find that the
combination of Evans and Grillo suggests the subject mater of Claim 1 as
well as claims 2, 4-12, 14-18, 20-24, and 26-28.
DECISION
In view of the foregoing, the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-
2, 4-12, 14-18, 20-24, and 26-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013