Appeal No. 1997-2895
Application 08/280,341
workstations see the notification being displayed on their
screens. The other workstations can then update the data on
their display screens. See Stefik at Col. 4, Lines 13 to 15
and Lines 28 to 32, Col. 7, Lines 18 to 36. One may consider
that the workstation generating the change in the data is the
control workstation. However, this control workstation does
not generate a “command” to the other workstations, and the
other workstations do not reduce in size the displays on their
screens and send the reduced size data to the control
workstation which can simultaneously display on its screen the
reduced displays from the other workstations. We are not
persuaded by the Examiner’s generalized statements like “[i]t
may be unclear and not explicitly disclosed [in Stefik] in
what manner the workstations are triggered to send the display
information; ...” [answer, page 12], or, the “Examiner admits
that the Office Action may not be clear on application of
Stefik et al. to the claim limitations. However, ... any
particular teachings not explicitly taught in Stefik et al.
could be extrapolated from Stefik et al. using an inherency
analysis for those claim limitations which Examiner does not
consider to be critical to the invention, including the
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007