Appeal No. 1999-0475
Application No. 08/402,031
Appellants’ arguments in response assert a failure of
Montagna to disclose every limitation in the claims as is
required to support a rejection based on anticipation. At
pages 7-9 of the Brief, Appellants’ arguments focus on the
assertion that, contrary to the Examiner’s interpretation of
Montagna, there is no disclosure of the display of a listing
of stored documents and forms “ . . . and of one or more kits
of documents and forms” as required by each of independent
claims 1 and 14.
After reviewing the Montagna reference in light of this
assertion of Appellants, we are in agreement with Appellants’
position as stated in the Briefs. Our interpretation of the
disclosure of Montagna coincides with that of Appellants,
i.e., there is no provision for the displaying of both a list
of documents and forms and a kit of documents and forms as set
forth in the appealed claims. We agree with Appellants that
even if the submenus illustrated in Figure 3 of Montagna are
interpreted as being kits of forms, there is no disclosure of
the display of both the stored kits and a listing of stored
documents and forms. In our view, the Examiner’s conclusion
is based on unwarranted conjecture and speculation that is not
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007