Appeal No. 1999-0890
Application 07/575,096
1737 (Fed. Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 961 (1988). The
controller of Iggulden does not control a display of a receipt
for a transaction on the display, as it only displays the
prompting text and input data on a three line display, and not
the receipt. Therefore the controller of Iggulden does not
perform the same function as the “controller means” as claimed by
Appellants.
Furthermore, the controller of Iggulden is in his Key-Fax
device and is not disclosed to be a PC with a graphics adapter
and an adapter board with serial communication ports. In fact,
as the processor of Iggulden drives the limited display function
required by Iggulden12 and communicates with few devices, it does
not require the graphics adapter and additional communication
ports of Appellants' "controller means".
In addition to the aforesaid analysis under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, sixth paragraph, the Examiner's position fails to account
for the further claim limitations that the controller is coupled
to the point of sale terminal, the display of the write input
device, to the digitizer of the write input device, and to the
storing means. The references simply fail to provide for a
12See figures 14-17.
14
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007