Appeal No. 97-2886
Application 08/441,493
limitations that “are considered old to game show formats in
general.” More specifically, the examiner is of the view that
randomly assigning point or dollar values to solution
areas in a game show where that point or dollar value
is awarded upon correct actions by a player are old to
game show formats themselves. Jeopardy has its random
"Daily Double" square that is randomly assigned.
Like appellant, we find no teaching or suggestion in the
applied prior art for the specific form of “character moving
means” or “random selection means” disclosed and claimed by
appellant in claim 15 on appeal. In contrast with the examiner’s
assertions, we are not aware that the “Daily Double” square on
the t.v. game show Jeopardy is “randomly assigned,” and even if
it were, we see no suggestion or incentive in such a teaching for
modifying the previously known anagram game of REVELATION™ in a
manner so as to result in the particular apparatus defined in
appellant’s claim 15 on appeal. The function and manner of use
of the “Daily Double” square on Jeopardy is entirely different
from the “random selection means” disclosed by appellant and
defined in appellant’s claim 15 on appeal, and is clearly not the
equivalent thereof. For this reason, we will not sustain the
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007