Appeal No. 94-3636
Application 07/889,660
The examiner points to figure 6 and states that "Appellant should refer to the descriptive
portion found in column 6 [sic, 4], lines 9-42 of Kita et al. which continuously refer to the CRT
display" (Examiner's Answer, page 15).
The examiner does not explain what in figure 6 corresponds to the claimed "indicators,"
"corresponding file selection button," or where the indicators "show[] the number of hits in the file
corresponding to the selection button," which makes our job of reviewing the factual correctness of
the rejection very difficult. Since Kita does not search the files for a search string, Kita does not
determine the number of hits or display the number of hits. For this reason, we find that the
"displaying" limitation is not anticipated by Kita. As previously discussed, the examiner erred in
finding that the cover and page search "keys correspond to applicant's selection button" (Examiner's
Answer, page 15). Nothing in figure 6 or the discussion thereof discloses indicators corresponding
to the cover and page search keys (the selection buttons according to the examiner) or indicators with
numbers as recited.
The anticipation rejection of claims 1 and 5-14 is reversed because Kita fails to suggest the
following limitations of representative claim 1: (1) "searching the content of each searchable record
of each file that is associated with a selection button . . . for the search string"; and (2) "displaying
on the screen display a plurality of indicators, each having a corresponding file selection button, and
each showing the number of hits in the file corresponding to the selection button."
REVERSED
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007