Ex parte KAPP et al. - Page 4




          Appeal No. 95-3991                                                          
          Application 08/233,546                                                      



          Sklarew                       4,972,496          Nov. 20, 1990              
          Robert Cowart, Mastering Windows 3.1, Special Edition, 1993,                
          pages 16-17 and 418-419 (Windows).                                          

          Claims 21, 23 and 33-37 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                      
          § 103.  As evidence of obviousness the examiner applies the                 
          prior art as follows:                                                       
          1. Claim 21 - the teachings of Winn, Sklarew and                            
          Dunkley;                                                                    
          2. Claim 23 - the teachings of Winn, Sklarew, Dunkley,                      
          Thrower and Hirsch;                                                         
          3. Claim 33 - the teachings of Winn, Sklarew, Dunkley,                      
          Thrower, Windows and Cairns;                                                
          4. Claim 34 - same as claim 33;                                             
                                                                                     
          5. Claim 35 - the teachings of Winn, Sklarew, Dunkley,                      
          Windows, Thrower and Hirsch;                                                
          6. Claim 36 - the teachings of Winn, Sklarew, Dunkley,                      
          Thrower, Cairns, Windows and Hirsch;                                        
          and                                                                         
          7. Claim 37 - the teachings of Thrower, Cairns,                             
          Windows                          and Hirsch.                                
          Rather than repeat the arguments of appellants or the                       
          examiner, we make reference to the brief and the answer for                 
          the respective details thereof.                                             

                                          4                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007