Appeal No. 1997-3145 Page 13
Application No. 08/058,199
Nor does Berry disclose display of an enlarged portion of an
image that is on the screen, along with the image. Thus, we
find that the teachings of Berry are not combinable with the
teachings of Hama.
Waller teaches that two images may be superimposed or
displayed independently, and that an enlargement of a partial
image may be displayed next to the original image as viewports
on a display screen (figure 2). However, Waller does not make
up for the deficiencies of Hama and Berry because we find no
showing in Waller, nor has the examiner pointed to any
suggestion, that a viewport of an original image will have an
enlarged partial image that is displayed, without overlap,
over the original image and the portion of the image selected
for enlargement (enlargement target region).
In sum, we find that Hama teaches away from the proposed
combination advanced by the examiner, and that the only
suggestion for the proposed combination of Hama, Berry, and
Waller comes from appellants' disclosure. We note, however,
that independent claim 36, in contrast to the other
independent claims 31-35, does not disclose that the enlarged
image display is displayed over the entire original image (or
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007