Appeal No. 96-1904
Application 08/164,854
These claims depend from claim 1, drawn to a
segmented computer keyboard, and thereby include the
recitation that the segmented keyboard may be operated
“independently of supporting surfaces.” Our review of the
applied references indicates to us
that the applied prior art would not have been suggestive of
such a segmented computer keyboard that operates
“independently of supporting surfaces.”
We affirm the rejection of claims 8, 9, 11, 12, 14,
15, 17, 18, and 21.
Prior to addressing the applied prior art, this
panel of the board notes that we have fully considered and
comprehend the content of each of these specified claims.
The respective patents to McCall, Lahr, Rader, and
Goldstein are viewed as reflecting keyboards with typical
keys.
16
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007