Appeal No. 96-3260 Page 5
Application No. 08/134,214
conclusion to the contrary must therefore be based on hindsight
gleaned from appellants’ own disclosure notwithstanding the
examiner’s rationale of an “obvious choice” so as to be
“visually aesthetic.”
Therefore, it also follows that since neither reference
discloses or suggests a border, as claimed, neither can suggest
“engaging a pointing means at least approximately on said
border...”
We now turn to independent claim 9.
Claim 9 recites that object breaks are replaced with
spaces. The examiner relies on page 82 of Baumgarten for a
teaching that all occurrences of two spaces can be replaced
with a single space and that the same technique can be used to
replace two hard returns with one hard return. We agree with
the examiner that this would appear to cover what is set forth
in instant claim 9.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007