Appeal No. 1999-1691
Application 08/531,812
is implemented in the body of the claim in part by installing a menu item for each of a
plurality of first application programs into a menu of a second application program "in
response to the opening of the second application program." This operation is repeated
in the execution clause where it is stated that the menu item was installed into a menu of
the second application program in response to the opening of the second application
program. Comparable limitations are found in independent claims 1, 7 and 13 on appeal.
In Padawer no menu item for program No. 1 is installed in program No. 2 upon
merely opening program No. 2 as required by representative independent claim 1 on
appeal. The "add" command of Figures 4 and 5 of Padawer permits the user to manually
add another program menu item to the user defined custom menu item block 114 in Figure
2, for example, as done in the example in Figure 6. This is not done by merely opening
program No. 2. Because the body of representative independent claim 1 on appeal, and
each independent claim on appeal as well, effects the dynamic construction of integrated
menus as set forth in the preamble of representative independent claim 1 on appeal, the
manual operation of the insertion discussed in the previous paragraph of this opinion from
the noted figures in Padawer does not meet the claimed functionality within 35 U.S.C.
§102. Thus, Padawer discloses only a manual method of adding menus items in response
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007