Appeal No. 2002-0954 Page 3
Application No. 09/543,632
allowing selection of a desired vocabulary word from
said interactive screen presentation by means of an
interactive peripheral;
providing an example of usage of the selected
vocabulary word on the video monitor wherein said example
of usage is a complete sentence utilizing said vocabulary
word; and
providing a synonym of said selected vocabulary word
in said complete sentence.
The following rejection is before us for review.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 21 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sorensen1.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellant regarding the above-noted rejection, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 11) for the examiner's complete reasoning in support of the rejection and to
the brief (Paper No. 10) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims, to the Sorensen patent, and to the respective
positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner. Based on our review, for the
reasons which follow, we cannot sustain the examiner’s rejection.
Independent claim 1 calls for, inter alia, a program which directs a programmable
apparatus to present on a video monitor both a complete sentence utilizing a selected
1 U.S. Patent No. 5,827,071, issued October 27, 1998 to Sorensen et al.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007