Ex parte JOHN R. KLUG - Page 3

           Appeal No. 95-4544                                                                  
           Application 07/975,905                                                              

           permit transmission of electrical signals corresponding with said file              
           editing operations therebetween;                                                    
                wherein said plurality of users are permitted to concurrently view             
           said given computer file and, subject to practical system limitations,              
           said computer file display means, multi-tasking processing means and                
           interconnecting means operate so that said file editing operations and              
           said corresponding limited data transfer to said display means occur on             
           a substantially real-time basis relative to said edit inputs to permit              
           said plurality of users at said different remote locations to review                
           with their respective display means said edits made to said given                   
           computer file substantially contemporaneously with the corresponding                
           input of said edits and execution of said file editing operations.                  

                The Examiner relies on the following reference:                                
           Jakobs et al. (Jakobs)           5,300,943        Apr. 5, 1994                      
                                       (effective filing date Oct. 3, 1986)                    

                Claims 1 through 11, 13 through 15, 17, 23, and 25 through                     
           28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being unpatentable                       
           over Jakobs .2                                                                       

                2We note that in the Examiner's answer, the Examiner                           
           withdrew the rejection of claims 1 through 11, 13 through 15, 17                    
           through  23, 25, and 26 under 35 U.S.C.  103 as being                              
           unpatentable over Bly and Kaufman and set forth this rejection as                   
           a new ground of rejection.                                                          

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007