Appeal No. 1998-2674
Application 08/329,724
Appellants are not harmed by any treatment of a rejection
not repeated in the Examiner's Answer because the brief
addresses the final rejection. In this case, we have
decided to review the rejection over Matthies for
completeness.
Dependent claim 21 recites that "the information
displayed in the cursor is moved the same distance and in
the same direction as the rest of the cursor." This is
interpreted to have the same meaning as the "information
portion . . . is displayed in a selected relative position
with respect to the pointing portion" in claim 1. Since
claim 21 defines that the information is moved the same
distance and direction as the rest of the cursor, this
limitation is not part of independent claim 20. The
question we asked at oral hearing is how the subject matter
of claim 20 distinguishes over the Matthies.
Counsel for Appellants argued that a "cursor" is
defined as "a movable item used to mark a position,"
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (Merriam-Webster,
Inc. 10th ed. 1997) and that claim 20 recites displaying the
information "within the cursor." Thus, claim 20 requires
- 11 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007