Appeal No. 1999-2723
Application 08/674,082
closed as a function of the associated window being opened or
closed. Darnell does not describe in any manner the movement
of notes between documents.
The examiner cites Johnston as teaching the
desirability of transferring any contents within one document
to another document regardless of window boundaries.
Appellants’ argument that a note is not content is well taken.
Content as described by Johnston and notes as described by
Darnell and appellants’ specification are completely
different. A note is a message which is separate from the
content of another document, but is attached to the other
document at a specific location. Content, as described by
Johnston, refers to information in a document which has been
assimilated into the document. The concept of moving content
from one document in Johnston to another document and
assimilating that content into the second document would not
have suggested to the artisan that notes as taught by Darnell
should be movable across boundaries like other movable content
because of the inherent differences between notes and content.
We are also persuaded by appellants’ argument that
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007