Appeal No. 1999-0595
Application 08/704,186
730 F.2d 1440, 1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir.); cert.
dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984); W.L. Gore and Associates,
Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
With respect to representative, independent claim 1,
the examiner indicates how he purports to read the invention
of claim 1 on the disclosure of Ishii [Paper No. 4,
incorporated into the examiner’s answer]. Specifically, the
examiner relies on Figure 15 of Ishii and the accompanying
description in the patent. Appellants argue that from the
calendar display of Figure 15, Ishii can select a specific
month for display using keys K or Ishii can use the scroll
TSU
keys to display the previous month or the following month.
Thus, appellants argue that Ishii cannot scroll the calendar
one week at a time to obtain the same view achieved by
appellants’ claimed invention [brief, pages 4-6]. The
examiner responds that appellants have not identified any
limitation of the claimed invention which Ishii does not
teach.
On the record before us, we agree with appellants that
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007