Appeal No. 97-0642
Application 08/242,318
the references do not "disclose or suggest a system which is
capable of multiple conversions between multiple text domains"
(Br24). Claim 31 does not require more than a first and
second text domain. Thus, the arguments are not commensurate
in scope with the claim. The discussion of the "text
extension system" in connection with claim 11 is also relevant
here.
Appellant has failed to rebut the prima facie case of
obviousness with respect to claim 31. The rejection of
claims 31-37 is sustained.
CONCLUSION
The rejections of claims 1-6, 8-20, 24-37 are sustained.
The rejections of claims 7 and 21-23 are reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
- 30 -
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007