Appeal No. 1999-0163
Application No. 08/745,698
failure to establish a prima facie case of obviousness since
all of the claim limitations are not taught or suggested by
the applied prior art references. In particular, Appellants
contend (Brief, pages 12 and 13) that the Hewlett-Packard
publication, which the Examiner relies upon to address the
claimed language selection initiation feature, does not
automatically start a language selection sequence on initial
printer power-up as required by the language of appealed
claims 4 and 7.
After careful review of the Hewlett-Packard reference, we
are in agreement with Appellants’ position as stated in the
Brief. Our interpretation of the Hewlett-Packard disclosure
coincides with that of Appellant, i.e., the eight step
sequence of multiple key stroke combinations described in the
reference for initiating language selection is anything but
automatic.
We take note of the fact that, at pages 29 and 30 of the
Answer, the Examiner offers an alternative interpretation of
the language of claims 4 and 7. In the Examiner’s view, the
claimed language selection operations can be interpreted as
requiring only one of the two operating modes, i.e., either
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007