Appeal No. 95-4629
Application 07/831,953
the invention intended to be recited in independent claim 5
and its most dependent claim, claim 9, there is no statement
of any tolerance range and whether a given image display
position is within or without this tolerance range as related
to any conditions recited. These considerations are all
significant because they widen the breadth of applicability of
prior art against the present claims. The examiner has taken
full advantage according to the reasoning that we understand
from the answers to this wider-scoped language of the claims.
Appellant's arguments are therefore not coextensive with the
actual recited conditional language of the claims and
therefore do not show a full appreciation of the breadth of
the subject matter set forth in the claims on appeal.
As to the first rejection of claims 1, 2, 5 and 6 under
35 U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Microsoft , we add to
®
the examiner's view our view as to the showing at page xii the
image showing of two windows overlapping each other. The
statement below these two depictions indicates to the user
that "to review a spreadsheet and a report from two separate
applications, you change the size of their windows so that
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007