Appeal No. 1998-0872
Application No. 08/438,479 Page 20
Smart discloses that the window for the control menu is
superimposed on the graphical display, we find that the control
menu is a control palette superimposed on the graphical image for
controlling a sub-image, with a sub-image being a selected area
viewed by a selected security device such as a camera.
Accordingly, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claim 106,
and claim 107 which depends therefrom, is affirmed.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 109 and 110 (Group
VI). Appellant asserts (brief, page 17) that the icon
graphically indicates the pan and tilt position of the camera and
that there is nothing in Smart to suggest this feature.
Appellant further asserts (id., and reply brief, page 5) that
"[i]n applicant's invention, the icon for the camera has a cone-
shaped extension to indicate the pan position of the camera with
the length of the extension to indicate the tilt position." We
find that claim 109 does not require that the icon graphically
represents the pan and tilt of the camera, as advanced by
appellant. The claim as drafted only requires that the graphical
indicia is "associated" with the icon. In addition, we that the
"cone-shaped" extension is not claimed. However, claim 109
requires that the graphical indicia representing pan and tilt are
indicated on the graphical image itself. We find that Smart
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007