Ex parte MELKUS et al. - Page 2

          Appeal No. 96-1343                                                          
          Application 07/993,225                                                      

          of data processing systems.  As explained on page 3 of the                  
                    Upon the display of an individual message to a                    
               user in the normal course of use of a data processing                  
               system, the present invention allows the user to                       
               determine whether a message is to be displayed in the                  
               future.  An OPTIONS pushbutton is provided in the                      
               message window and is used to display the selections to                
               the user.  If the user chooses that the message not be                 
               displayed, then future occurrences of the message                      
               producing action, which would normally cause the                       
               message to be displayed, will result in no display of                  
               the message.  If the user selects that the message is                  
               to be displayed, then the user can choose the procedure                
               for removing the message from the screen.  The message                 
               can be removed automatically after the message has been                
               displayed for a user selected period of time, or upon                  
               the occurrence of a specific or general user action.                   
               In this manner, individual messages can be controlled                  
               with regard to the display and removal of the messages.                
               Independent claims 1 and 9 are illustrative of the appealed            
          subject matter and copies thereof, as they appear in the appendix           
          to appellants’ brief, are appended to this opinion.                         
               The single reference of record relied upon by the examiner             
          is support of the standing rejection is:                                    
          Obata et al. (Obata)          5,018,082           May 21, 1991              

               The following reference is cited by this panel of the board            
          in support of a new rejection made pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.196(b):           
               The Speller/Thesaurus chapter of the operation manual                  
               for WordPerfect® Version 4.2 (1986)                                    


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007