Appeal No. 1999-2723
Application 08/674,082
observes that Johnston teaches that users should be able to
drag any content from any window to any other window that
accepts the content’s type. Thus, the examiner finds that it
would have been obvious to the artisan to move notes
(contents) as taught by Darnell across boundaries as taught by
Johnston [answer, pages 4-5]. Appellants respond that Darnell
does not teach attaching a note to the content of a client
area of a window initially or after releasing the note nor
moving the note across boundaries of a window. Appellants
also respond that a note is not content and that Johnston does
not teach that the content is attached when it is dropped
[reply brief, pages 2-3].
We agree with appellants that claim 1 is patentable
over the teachings of Darnell and Johnston. First, although
the note record in Darnell includes the note position relative
to the associated window [column 6, line 35], there is no
indication that this position establishes attachment to
content within the client area of the window. Thus, the exact
position at which the note was attached to the content in
Darnell is not clearly taught in Darnell. Notes in Darnell
are associated with the title of the window and are opened and
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007