Appeal No. 1998-0621
Application No. 08/323,288
We agree with the Examiner that MacKay "clearly shows"
the claimed non-overlapping data windows, and Price’s screen
image 33, which is not dependent on screen size 31, reads on
the "independent size" recitation. (Answer-page 8.)
Appellants argue that the references are from non-
analogous arts, and therefore not combinable. Appellants
contend that Price is designed for use by aircraft pilots, and
MacKay is designed for use in coordinating multi-media
systems, such as film editing. (Brief-page 10.) We note that
Appellants have not alleged an art area for their own
invention.
The Examiner responds that the arts are analogous in that
both references utilize eye goggle displays (answer-page 10).
We agree with the Examiner even more generically, in that both
references deal with displaying computer generated
information. Additionally, we note Appellants’ own
specification states:
Numerous computer systems and data display systems
can benefit from the virtual screen of the present
invention. This includes air traffic control (both
operations and training), heterogeneous database
visualization, multi-media database visualization,
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007