Appeal No. 96-0300
Application 08/090,285
shown in Figs. 19-20 and 21-22. The noted "non-informational
cue means" identified by the examiner does not presently
appear in independent claim 8 but presently takes the form of
"unobtrusive cue means". Since it does not matter for our
analytical purposes whether the teachings and suggestions of
Vela and Tannehill are considered in any order, the examiner-
noted teachings and suggestions in Tannehill do not overcome
the deficiencies of Vela and vice versa. Again, there are
significant recitations in independent claim 8 relating to the
thumb operated buttons being located on each side of the
display screen proximate the hand grip portions for operating
display functions with the thumb while the user maintains a
hand grip on the display handle. Even given the teaching
identified by the examiner at col. 14, lines 15 to 25 of
Tannehill that the location of a display means may be placed
in other locations about the cart, to the extent this location
in Tannehill relates to the embodiments shown in Figs. 17 and
18, we conclude that the artisan would not have been led among
the collective teachings and showings of both references to
have arrived at the presently claimed subject matter detailed
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007