Ex parte BEER et al. - Page 6




          Appeal No. 97-2538                                                          
          Application 08/280,907                                                      

          It is evident that the examiner is relying on Fleming for                   
          these features of the appellants’ claimed invention:                        
                    1.   a template area pane which creates template                  
               objects from any object copied into said template                      
               area pane; and                                                         
                    2.   in response to the copying of at least one                   
               template object from the template area pane into an                    
               empty space within the template area pane,                             
               automatically creating and displaying at least one                     
               new template object in the template object pane.                       
               The examiner has identified the space within Fleming’s                 
          object dispenser icon 27 as equivalent to a template area pane              
          having the size of a single object.  Ignoring for the moment                
          that Fleming’s document objects are not template objects, it                
          is true that whatever document that gets dragged and dropped                
          into the space within the dispenser object icon 27 becomes a                
          dispensable object having its own mini-icon.  See Fleming’s                 
          Figures 7-9.  Additionally, a user may drag Fleming’s                       
          dispensable object mini-icon from within the object dispenser               
          icon 27 to elsewhere on the client area 19 and drop it to form              
          a copy of the object.  See Figures 1-3.  However, these                     
          functions of Fleming’s system do not satisfy the above-noted                
          claim features of the appellants.                                           



                                          6                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007