Appeal No. 1997-0810
Application No. 08/512,072
to move to the next misread character, the next misread
character and its bit position, is selected by the system, not
the operator. Thus, this claim limitation is not met by Ho.
Also, the Examiner admits that manual positioning is not
disclosed in the APA (answer-bottom of page 4), and does not
rely on Wroblewski for this teaching. Since manual
positioning of the marker cursor is not taught or shown to be
obvious over the references of record, we will not sustain the
rejection of claim 1. Likewise, claims 2 and 3, dependent
from claim 1, include the same unmet limitation, and we will
not sustain the rejection of these claims.
Additionally, claim 4 recites the same unmet limitation in
lines 8 and 9, therefore we will not sustain the rejection of
this claim.
We note that Appellant argues impermissible
hindsight in combining APA, Ho and Wroblewski, stating “One
dealing with binary data signals would not look to document
devices based upon character reading as a source of
inspiration.” (Brief-page 6.) We disagree. The title of
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007