Appeal No. 96-1347
Application 08/207,469
Figure 3, it is the fingers themselves, not finger-actuated
buttons, that are sensed by appellants’ invention. In light
of the disclosure, we agree with appellants. The rejection
will not be sustained.
Claim 17
Claim 17 specifies that the touchpad is void of visual
indications indicating distinct keys. According to the
examiner, it would have been obvious to omit the labels on
Bequaert’s keys in order to reduce cost. This rationale is
not found in the prior art as required by Fritch, and would
seriously reduce the usefulness of Bequaert’s system.
Accordingly, the rejection will not be sustained.
CONCLUSION
The rejections are not sustained.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007