Appeal No. 1997-3433
Application 08/395,548
Appellants argue that Thessin does not teach the three
steps which the Examiner finds to be inherent (Br8-11). It is
clear that column 8, lines 35-47, and column 9, lines 13-23,
say nothing about the three steps which the Examiner finds to
be inherent, but only refer to OLE. In response to
Appellants' arguments that Thessin does not teach the three
steps, the Examiner brings in Microsoft OLE, which discusses
data formats and the clipboard for OLE on a single computer
(EA9-11, responding to arguments A1 to A3). Thus, the
Examiner has changed the rejection by changing how the
references are combined and applied. The intended rejection
is now based on how one of ordinary skill in the art would
have interpreted the OLE references in Thessin given the OLE
teachings contained in Microsoft OLE. Appellants correctly
observe that "[t]he natural combination of Thessin et al. with
the Microsoft OLE reference therefore simply produces the same
system as already described in Thessin et al., with the
Microsoft OLE reference available to flesh out some of the
details omitted from Thessin et al. ..." (Br12). Appellants
provide a description of Thessin in Figure C of the Attachment
to the Brief. "The depiction of Figure C is based on the
- 6 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007