Appeal No. 97-1657 Page 7
Application No. 08/216,735
that Hogan does not teach the claimed step of automatically
altering a value for at least one other variable in response
to the aforementioned altering of the value. (Final Rejection
at 2.)
The examiner notes that Gay discloses establishing
numerical relationships between graphical objects, such that
the size of one object affects or controls the size of the
other. (Id. at 3 (citing Gay, col. 6, ll. 33-37 and 46-54).)
Based on Hogan’s teaching of ensuring consistency between data
in a local store and in a database system, col. 5, ll. 8-21,
the examiner opines that it would have been obvious to alter
automatically a value for at least one other variable in
response to the aforementioned altering of the value to
“ensure[] that interrelated elements maintain their
independent relationships.” (Final Rejection at 3, 5.)
Obviousness cannot be established by combining teachings
of the prior art to produce a claimed invention absent some
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007