Appeal No. 2000-1323
Application No. 08/923,474
The examiner relies on the following references:
Dilts et al. (Dilts) 5,455,854 Oct. 03, 1995
Shastry et al. (Shastry) 5,511,116 Apr. 23, 1996
Bayless et al. (Bayless) 5,754,636 May 19, 1998
(effective filing date Nov. 01, 1994)
Claims 1-30 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103. As evidence of obviousness,
the examiner cites Dilts and Bayless with regard to claims 1-18, 20-24 and 26-29, adding
Shastry with regard to claims 19, 25 and 30.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the respective positions of
appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
With regard to the independent claims 1, 6 and 10, the examiner takes the position
that Dilts discloses the display of information on a client workstation, wherein the
information is collected by a communication management server and wherein an object
image symbol is created and displayed using a GUI on the client workstation. Specifically,
the examiner points to the abstract of Dilts.
The examiner recognizes that Dilts does not teach the steps of defining a behavior
of an object image symbol, inputting information into the object image symbol,
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007