Appeal 2007-0802
Application 10/317,930
ISSUE
The issue is whether Appellants have shown that the Examiner erred
in rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Appellants focus on
Sharder’s combination of haptic effects developed at different locations in a
network and allege that the Examiner has not shown that such display
mechanism relates to a virtual display or a scanning tactile display
simulating sensation of lateral motion across a selected body location over a
tactile display (Br. 15). The issue turns on whether the combination of
Sharder with Lake teaches or suggests the claimed subject matter related to a
tactile display, as recited in claim 1.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Sharder describes a system for transmitting data related to haptic
sensory-motor effects wherein a matrix of moveable rods interact
with a user as the user touches the rods and moves them (col. 2, ll.
37-42).
2. Sharder describes the computer system for selective activation of
the matrix elements (col. 3, ll. 51-66) while the elements for
monitoring the haptic sensory effect are described as a touchpad of
matrix rods that are moveable within a substrate (col. 4, ll. 12-23).
3. Sharder includes a feedback mechanism for transmitting the haptic
effect from one terminal to another which, in effect, uses the
information from the user input from one terminal as the data
values to be transmitted to the other terminal and to be applied to
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013