Appeal No. 1999-1452
Application 08/436,830
Pazel. Moreover, Berry’s showings in Figures 2-6 indicate that by the use of the object
link operator, he shows that the actual underlying data structures of the data files have
been changed consistent with the modifying language of representative claim 1 on
appeal. Consistent with this view, for example, the Figure 3 showing and its discussion
at the bottom of column 3 of Berry indicates that by clicking on the PB1 220 (push-
button 1) the data from the array AR1 230 is actually inserted physically into the DB1
210 or database 210. Thus, the data file modification operation depicted in the figures
is actually effected, as claimed, by the use of the GUI operators.
In the context of the generalized teachings of program editing in a Windows
environment in Pazel and the use of GUIs in an object-oriented programming editor of
Berry, both teachings would have been compelling to the artisan to overcome the
known prior art editing and program redesign approaches of the prior art discussed at
the bottom of appellant’s specification page 2 and the top of page 3. There it is clear
that it is known in the art to perform such modifying or editing operations within the
context of object-oriented programming but in a very cumbersome manner. The
graphical user interface approaches of Berry and Pazel clearly would have been an
obvious ideal methodology by which the user obviously would have overcome these
known prior art difficulties. The broadly defined modifying of independent claim 1 and
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007