Appeal No. 2000-0971
Application No. 08/642,224
definition #23 which is a single unit, as in counting, rating or measuring. From this wide
spectrum of definitions, it is our opinion that a rate of “points per second” may also
reasonably be considered to be a number of dots per second. Tsuji teaches the use of
the dots as a measure of the rate of scroll. Therefore, it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to scroll based upon this rate.
Appellants argue that the scroll rate of a number of pixels or dots per second
does not correspond to appellants’ constant number of font points per unit time. (See
brief at page 14.) We do not find support for appellants’ argument in the language of
claims 8 and 16 as to constant number of font points per unit time. Therefore, this
argument is not persuasive. Appellants argue that there is a different rate of scroll
between a screen that has 60 dots per inch and a screen that has 120 dots per inch
whereas with appellants’ use of points per second would give the same scroll rate
between the two different screens. (See brief at pages 14-15.) We do not find support
for appellants’ argument in the language of claims 8 and 16 as to constant number of
font points per unit time and the difference between display screens. Therefore, this
argument is not persuasive. We note that claims 8 and 16 are directed to a SINGLE
display which would have a single rate of scroll. Therefore, this argument is not
persuasive. Appellants argue that the examiner has not provided a proper technical
reason or motivation to combine the teachings of the references. (See brief at page
15.) While we agree with appellants that the examiner has not expressly expanded
12
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007