Appeal No. 2000-0357
Application 08/941,186
With regard to claims 1-3, 9, 10 and 12-18, it is the examiner’s position that MacGregor
shows a processor [column 5, lines 23-54] and a graphical user interface [Figures 3 and 6(b)]. The
examiner indicates that while MacGregor provides a sort function for rearranging spreadsheet
data based on one or more sort keys, wherein the sort key indicates what data is to be stored,
MacGregor does not teach a sort routine for rearranging table data based on one or more “hidden” sort
keys. Thus, the examiner turns to Stodghill for a system that may be programmed
to operate a computer spreadsheet program having fields for entering data, wherein each field is
associated with a data object data attribute (“doda”), the “doda” being hidden from the user and
containing information and algorithms to identify the data format corresponding to the field to which it is
linked [Stodghill-column 2, lines 45-65; column 3, lines 25-32].
It is the examiner’s position that since artisans would have known that a sort routine includes a
comparison of data in different fields, would have recognized that a comparison is made based on some
criteria and that the outcome of the comparison determines what action is to be taken and would have
recognized that a doda object could be programmed with a validation algorithm by a developer and
that the developer could substitute a comparison algorithm with a sorting algorithm, it would have been
obvious to incorporate the apparatus of Stodghill into the apparatus of MacGregor since it would
provide a developer with the flexibility in designing functions for users.
Appellant argues that while MacGregor discloses a system for sorting cells in a spreadsheet
based on values in either a selected row or a selected column of the spreadsheet, the rows and columns
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007