Appeal No. 97-1223 Page 10
Application No. 08/147,143
suggested the claimed displaying of a menu page. The claimed
menu page is displayed when the return to menu button is
selected. As aforementioned, neither Capps nor Slate teaches
a return to menu button. Although Soviero teaches a MENU
button, it is unclear what contents are displayed when the
button is selected. Thus, it is uncertain whether it performs
the function of the claimed return to menu button. For the
foregoing reasons, the examiner failed to show the references
would have suggested displaying a navigation dialog box or
displaying a menu page as in independent claim 1 and its
dependent claims 2-13 and 39. Accordingly, we find the
examiner’s rejection of these claims does not amount to a
prima facie case of obviousness. Because the examiner has not
established a prima facie case, the rejection of claims 1-13
and 39 is improper. Therefore, we reverse the rejection of
the claims 1-13 and 39 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Rejection of Claims 14-18 and 40
Regarding independent claim 14, the examiner makes a
blanket obviousness rejection. Claim 14 is rejected “per the
rationale of claims 1-3 as it applies to menus.” (Examiner’s
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007