Appeal No. 97-0642
Application 08/242,318
Kato as a selective conversion system on a pen-based computer
as taught by Sklarew. It appears from our reading of the
rejection that the Examiner has found a pen-based computer and
a kana/kanji conversion system and combined the teachings
based on Appellant's disclosure rather than a teaching in the
prior art. While we do not find the motivation to combine
Kato, we consider Sklarew alone sufficient to establish a
prima facie case of obviousness.
The Examiner states that Appellant's arguments have been
addressed in the statement of the rejection (EA27). However,
the statement of the rejection repeats the rejection from the
Final Rejection (apparently verbatim) and does not
specifically address the arguments. This is not helpful to
Appellant or to this panel in trying to decide the merits of
the rejections.
Appellant argues that "to the extent that Sklarew's
handwriting recognition might be characterized as a
'conversion,' that conversion is not initiated by the user
with any type of gesture" (Br15) because "the handwriting
recognition process is executed automatically without the aid
of a gesture or any other user intervention (see column 10,
- 14 -
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007