Appeal No. 1997-3909
Application 08/430,090
We have thoroughly reviewed the answer and
supplemental answer, and agree with Appellant. The Examiner
has completely ignored the during limitation, which is not
taught by Yabuuchi or APA. Thus, we will not sustain the
Examiner’s rejection of claim 11, and likewise claims 12 and
13 which depend therefrom.
Finally, we will consider the rejection of the Group
III claims, claim 16 being considered the representative
claim. We note that APA is not used in this rejection, and
that Yabuuchi is the sole reference applied. Thus,
Appellant’s argument that help messages, per se, are not
recited in Yabuuchi is more relevant here. However, as
broadly recited in claim 16, we find that “help information”
is met by Yabuuchi in its annotations. Annotations by their
nature provide a further explanation or comment on the text to
which they are attached. In providing an annotation, we find
that such a further explanation or comment helps in
understanding the text to which it is attached or is ancillary
thereto.
Appellant repeats the means-plus-function argument
-10-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007