Appeal No. 2001-1073
Application No. 08/747,356
display, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have
modified Peterson to include data icons within node icons
and arrows that connect the data icons to node icons.”
Furthermore, Appellant argues (brief at page 5) that “[t]he
Examiner has established no motivation . . . to further modify
such a combined system of Peterson and Kogan to store an edit-
time display manner including information on the display position
of the node icon within the edit image, as claimed.”
We agree with Appellant’s analysis of the combination of
Peterson, Hansen and Kogan. Even if these references were
properly combinable, Peterson only shows node icons 242a, 242b,
242c in Figures 10 and 11 which represent screens but does not
show any data icons disposed within the node icons. We are not
convinced that Hansen via Figure 6 and the associate text
suggests that data icons would be disposed within the node icons
of Peterson. Instead, Hansen uses a dialog box to create the
link between the various node icons or various screens such
as 412, 410 and 414 in Figure 4 of Hansen. Whereas Kogan may
suggest the editing feature as suggested by the Examiner, it does
not disclose the creation of data icons and the links connecting
the various data icons in the various node icons as recited in
claim 1 or independent claim 6 or independent claim 14.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007