Appeal No. 1999-2641
Application No. 08/644,119
determining if said change is desired to be applied to said control in
response to second user input;
applying said change to said control in said main window if said
change is desired to be applied to said control.
The examiner relies on the following references:
Li et al. (Li) 5,555,370 Sep. 10, 1996
(filed Dec. 28, 1993)
Cain et al. (Cain) 5,651,108 Jul. 22, 1997
(filed Jan. 11, 1996)
Claims 18-61 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Cain in
view of Li.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the respective positions of
appellants and the examiner.
OPINION
Similarly to Appeal No. 99-2615, the examiner here takes the position that Cain
discloses the instant claimed subject matter but for displaying a copy of the control in
the preview window in response to selecting that control for an editing transaction. The
examiner turns to Li for such a teaching, identifying column 4, lines 3-29, and Figures 9
and 11 of Li. Finally, the examiner concludes that it would have been obvious
to provide displaying a copy of control in preview window in response to
selecting control for editing transaction as taught by Li to the development
system for visual inheritance and improved object reusability of Cain; in
order permitting a user to efficiently create an application utilizing a plurality
of objects in a graphic user interface graphically presents objects to the user
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007