Appeal No. 1998-2983
Application No. 08/481,230
With respect to claim 8, appellants rely upon the argument presented with respect
to claim 6 and the activation of a control to transfer the video picture back to a third type of
window. As with claim 6, the examiner has not addressed the language of claim 8 in the
rejection or in the response to the arguments section. Similarly, we cannot sustain the
rejection of claim 8 for the same reasons with respect to claim 6.
With respect to claims 14, 16 and 17, appellants rely upon the argued allowability of
claim 18 for patentability. We disagree with appellants as discussed above with respect
to claim 1, which is grouped with claim 18. Therefore, we sustain the rejection of these
claims for the same reasons with respect to claim 18.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-5, 7 and 9-12, and
14-18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed, and the decision of the examiner to reject claims
6 and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may
be extended under 37 CFR § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007