Appeal No. 95-1428
Application 08/031,036
with the examiner's conclusions (Answer, page 3) concerning the
interchangeability of input devices for data processing systems
(e.g., graphic image processing systems and ATMs), and the
obviousness of mounting "Field's color and character pattern
selecting means on the key pad in view of Oka." Stated
differently, we are of the opinion that the skilled artisan would
have known that a touch panel screen, a keyboard and a mouse are
interchangeably used to input data (e.g., character and color
data) to a data processing system. In essence, we are not2
convinced by appellants' arguments throughout the brief that the
skilled artisan would not have known to place character and color
selections on keys of a key pad.
Notwithstanding our agreement with the examiner's position
(Answer, page 3), we find that the examiner has not come to grips
with the claimed invention as a whole. For example, each of the
claims on appeal requires an "executing key" mounted to the "top
surface" of the switch pad/casing. The "executing means" in
Field is a mouse, and it is not mounted to the "top surface" of
2As an aside, we note that the claims on appeal are couched
in terms that are broad enough to read on both mechanical "keys"
and electronic "keys." The screen in Figure 5-1 of Field is an
electronic "switch pad" or "casing," and the icons displayed on
the "top surface" of the screen are electronic character and
color "selecting keys."
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007