Appeal No. 96-1444
Application 08/130,577
decision states (D8): "One of ordinary skill in the art would
have been motivated to store separate images in Tatsumi in
interleaved byte planes in view of Wakeland or, alternatively,
to output the separate images in Wakeland to separate displays
in view of Tatsumi." The rejection is based on the
independent foreground and background images in Wakeland being
displayed on separate displays, not being used as overlays.
Appellants argue (RR6): "The combination of Wakeland
with Tatsumi et al. suggest[s] none of the benefits achieved
by the claimed invention, namely the projection of the
presentation of display on an external monitor while
displaying other information (e.g., speaker's notes or the
like) on an internal display, or the ability to be able to
switch images between the two displays so one image can be
queued up before it is sent to the viewing audience or so that
one can view speaker's notes while displaying the slide with
which the speaker's notes are associated." We do not find
these limitations expressly or implicitly recited in claim 1
and appellants do not point to any claim language.
Appellants argue (RR6-7): "Further, there is no hint in
the references of eliminating the controllers for each
- 9 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007