Appeal No. 96-1082
Application 08/275,882
application and a peripheral device as recited in the appealed
claims.
We agree with appellants. In our view, the examiner
has not properly interpreted the scope of the claimed
invention nor the disclosures of Boulia and Torres. A
critical feature of independent claims 10 and 14 is that the
stored bit maps contain “a facsimile response of a combination
of an application and a peripheral device.” We construe this
claim language as requiring that the stored bit maps be a
function of both the application running and a peripheral
device upon which the information is to be generated.
Although the examiner asserts that this condition is present
in Boulia and Torres, we agree with appellants that the
claimed feature quoted above is not suggested by Boulia and
Torres, whether considered individually or together.
Although we consider the stored bit maps of Boulia and
Torres to be a facsimile response of “something”, that
something is not a combination of an application and a
peripheral device. The bit maps stored in Boulia and Torres
are based on information derived only from the selected font
and items related to that font. There is no suggestion in
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007