Ex parte BEER et al. - Page 9

          Appeal No. 1997-1199                                                        
          Application No. 08/309,366                                                  

          agree with the Examiner that Tyne’s folder can be considered                
          as one group (answer, page 3), however, there is no evidence                
          to support the Examiner’s assertion (id. 4) that “it would                  
          have been obvious . . . to organize the attribute sets into                 
          groups.”  Thus, the suggested combination cannot meet the                   
          steps of claim 1 involving the manipulation of groups, e.g.,                
          the step of “selecting one group from the group of                          
               Furthermore, we agree with Appellants that Tyne does not               
          show the claimed workstation attributes (brief, page 5).  We                
          find that in Tyne’s fig. 13.1, each of the icons facilitates                
          the creation of another icon specific to a particular device,               
          a printer, which may then be dragged to a desired location                  
          (p. 300 of Tyne), and that icon then would not be a part of                 
          the Examiner-called template types pane of fig. 13.1.                       
          Similarly, Sanchez-Frank does not show the claimed attributes               
          since, as Appellants state, regarding fig. 2 of Sanchez-Frank,              
          “[n]etwork configuration and protocol definitions provide                   
          controls to manipulate icons in the workspace 8 and are thus                
          not system attributes.” (Id. 7).  Thus, we do not sustain the               

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007