Appeal No. 2001-0374
Application No. 08/971,255
Nagai, we do not find any teaching or suggestion in the prior art
that supports the obviousness of the claimed user interactive
means for activating a transient display of a selected attribute
and for selecting the attribute to be transiently displayed. The
Examiner has further failed to establish how the user selection
of the reset button, which only updates the same types of values
for the same displayed attributes, may be equated to the
limitation of user selecting the attribute to be transiently
displayed, as recited in independent claims 1, 7 and 13.
Similarly, the updating of the displayed attribute values, as
disclosed by Pitchaikani, neither teaches nor suggests the
claimed “activating for a selected time period a transient
display of a selected attribute” of a displayed object proximate
to that object since the reference passively displays all the
attributes and their values in one pop-up window.
Based on our analysis above, we find that the Examiner has
failed to set forth a prima facie case of obviousness because
Nagai and Pitchaikani neither teach nor would have suggested to
one of ordinary skill in the art selecting the attribute to be
displayed and activating a transient display of that attribute
for a selected time period. Accordingly, we do not sustain the
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007