Appeal No. 2000-0829
Application 09/079,054
examiner directs the applicants to portions in Taylor which
describes storing information and retrieving information, but not
retrieving the information through a list of options.
Taylor describes storing lighting parameters associated with
a selected light (Taylor, e.g., col. 3, lines 54-68, and col. 33,
lines 42-52) and being able to retrieve the information
associated with a selected light (Taylor, e.g., col. 17, lines
45-52, col. 34, lines 22-24 and lines 52-54). Applicants have
failed to demonstrate otherwise.
The applicants argue that the examiner’s reasoning for
providing a list of options for a selected lighting device is
based on hindsight. Any judgment on obviousness is in a sense
necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning, but
so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within
the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was
made and does not include knowledge gleaned only from applicant's
disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper." In re McLaughlin,
443 F.2d 1392, 1395, 170 USPQ 209, 212 (CCPA 1971).
The examiner argues that providing a multi-level pull-down
menu to retrieve information of a selected object was well known
at the time of the invention, and that such knowledge is not
based on hindsight. The examiner, in its answer cites to US
Patent 5,689,669 for the proposition that such teaching was well
9
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007