Appeal No. 2000-2211
Application No. 09/031,316
(Fed. Cir. 1999). Thus, the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of claim
24 is sustained.
Turning to claims 21 through 23 and 25, we agree with
appellants’ argument (brief, page 7) that “each recites a process
applied to a computer that produces a useful, concrete, and
tangible result,” namely, the creation of a device-independent
bitmap. Unlike claim 24, these claims receive a calling by the
application program. Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection
of claims 21 through 23 and 25 is reversed.
DECISION
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 21 through 25
under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is affirmed as to claim 24, and is reversed
as to claims 21 through 23 and 25.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007