Appeal No. 96-3561
Application No. 08/045,241
OPINION
We have carefully reviewed the evidence of record,
including, inter alia, the arguments of appellants and the
examiner and, based on such a review, we will sustain the
rejection of claims 1, 14, 19, 20 and 35 under 35 U.S.C. 103
but we will not sustain the rejection of claims 2 through 13
and 15 through 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103.
With regard to claims 1, 6, 7, 11, 14 through 17, 19 and
20, the examiner applies Hayden, alone, contending that Hayden
shows an information processing system comprising a computer
and a display for displaying graphic data (telephone icons) to
represent operation modes (active mode, hold mode, incoming
mode, conference call mode) of the processing system. Hayden
clearly indicates that the “shape” of the icon can be changed,
“depending upon the state of the party” [column 5, lines 23-
27]. While the claimed memory is not explicitly shown, the
examiner contends that it would have been “obvious to have a
memory in Hayden’s system to store the graphic data since a
computer needs a memory to store and process data.” With
regard to claims 6, 7, 14 and 17, specifically, the examiner
contends that it would have been “obvious to have memory means
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007