Appeal No. 96-1534 Application 07/888,991 The examiner has made an effort to read claim 28 on the disclosure of Li [answer, pages 6-8], a procedure which we highly recommend. Notwithstanding the examiner’s assertion of how Li anticipates all the limitations of claim 28, appellants argue that Li fails to disclose any of the steps recited in substeps (b)(1)- (b)(3) [reply brief, pages 11-14]. We find ourselves in agreement with appellants. Appellants correctly point out that Li has nothing to do with the manner in which records are accessed after a query has been made. Li simply relates to a graphical interface which assists the user in visualizing how a range of values of a record field relates to the total range of values of that field. The user can visualize the range between two values of a field, but Li does not indicate how the records are to be accessed once the query has been set by the user. Thus, Li cannot anticipate the accessing steps recited in claim 28. We also note that the examiner has determined that substeps (b)(1) and (b)(2) are always possible within Li, and since the selection is effectively an OR condition, claim 28 is thereby satisfied [answer, page 7]. This rejection was made before the claim was amended to read “any one of,” and, as noted above, the examiner has not addressed the significance of this 6Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007