Appeal No. 1997-1665 Page 18
Application No. 08/289,134
obvious over Capps in view of Shojima. Next, we address
claims 3-5.
Claims 3-5
The appellants argue that "the prior art references fail
to teach or suggest" the features of claims 3-5. (Appeal Br.
at 15.) Claim 3-5 each specifies in pertinent part the
following limitations: "a plurality of line segments are
displayed, and said operation serves to designate an
intersecting angle between at least two line segments, said
command rearranging at least
said two line segments at a predetermined angle for
representation." Accordingly, the limitations require
rearranging line segments at a predetermined angle.
The examiner fails to show a suggestion of the
limitations in the prior art. He admits, "CAPPS is silent
about rearranging various line segments at a preselected angle
...." (Examiner's Answer at 6.) Faced with this silence, the
examiner alleges, "Shojima, however discloses a plurality of
line segments being displayed (figure 10 (a)-(d)), rearranging
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007