Appeal No. 2000-0265
Application No. 08/927,903
which is viewed by a user and the scene would be in response to data indicative of the
status of the vehicle.
Appellants argue that each pictogram does not have its own exclusive
predesignated position and that the pictograms in/on the display are fixed. (See brief at
pages 7-8.) We agree with appellants that the disclosure of Reed appears to imply that
the display is flexible and that the graphic representations are not in fixed or exclusive
predesignated positions on the display. Reed discloses that the display may be used to
display "many more, or even less" than four communication units on the display. (See
Reed at page 5.) Additionally, Reed discloses that the graphic representations may be
altered or customized to meet a customer's needs. (See Reed at page 4.) With the
described flexibility and alterability of the displayed graphic information, it is our
reasoned opinion that the graphic representations taught by Reed would not teach or
read on the "reproduction means are arranged to visually reproduce the symbols of the
set of at least three visual symbols as respective different pictograms in predesignated
positions such that each different pictogram has its own exclusive predesignated
position and the pictograms are situated relative to one another so as to form a
two-dimensional scene" as recited in the language of independent claim 1.
The examiner cites to Figures 1 and 3 and to pages 4 and 5 of Reed to support
the finding of anticipation. We disagree with the examiner. At best the graphic
representations when displayed are presented relative to each other, but the
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007