Appeal No. 2000-0112 Page 9
Application No. 08/935,005
We agree with appellant that all the limitations recited
in independent claims 5 and 8 are not met by the teachings of
either Huang or Diamond. In particular, it is clear that the
prior art fails to teach or suggest alternate lines of text
which are oppositely oriented, in which all letters in each
word are arranged from left to right in all lines of text.
Nor, does the prior art teach or suggest the method step of
arranging all letters in each word from left to right in
oppositely oriented alternate lines of text.
Looking first at the Huang reference, we observe that it
discloses a method of horizontal typesetting for printing that
involves arranging a first row of Chinese characters from left
to right, a second row of Chinese characters from right to
left, and so on, until completion of the entire text. Huang
goes on to explain that in reading the text one would read the
first line from left to right, proceed from the right to the
left in reading the second line, and so on, until completion.
The examiner determined (final rejection, p. 4) that
Huang lacks the claimed limitation that all letters in each
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007