Appeal No. 96-3056
Application No. 08/173,287
examiner has indicated how he reads these claims on the
disclosure of Baber [answer, page 3]. Appellant argues that
Baber does not disclose the step of associating the selected
information to the designated calendar event. Appellant also
argues that Baber does not disclose the step of selecting
information from a multimedia presentation. Finally,
appellant argues that Baber does not designate a calendar
event, but rather, creates a calendar event. The examiner
disagrees with each of appellant’s arguments and argues that
appellant is interpreting the scope of the claimed invention
too narrowly.
We agree with the examiner that Baber discloses
selecting
information from a multimedia presentation [column 11, lines
4-8], and that in order to create a calendar event Baber must
first broadly designate a calendar event (such as date in
Baber’s Figures 2a and 2b). We do not agree with the
examiner, however, that the step or means of “associating said
selected information to the designated calendar event within
the data processing system” is disclosed by Baber.
On this point appellant argues that the information
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007