Ex Parte ALDRED et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2001-1070                                                        
          Application No. 08/678,781                                                  


               Claim 15 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it              
          reads as follows:                                                           
               15.  A computer workstation including:                                 
               means for storing and displaying an electronic                         
                    sheet, said electronic sheet being logically divided              
                    into a set of cells, each said cell being able to                 
                    contain no more than a single character;                          
                         means to enable a user to select a portion of said           
                    electronic sheet, said portion comprising at least one            
                    said cell; and                                                    
                         means, responsive to a user input, for editing               
                    said selected portion of said electronic sheet.                   
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Torres                        5,040,131           Aug. 13, 1991             
          Bates et al. (Bates)     EP 0 550 374 A2          Jul.  7, 1993             
          (Published European Patent Application)                                     
               Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being             
          unpatentable over Torres.                                                   
               Claims 1 through 14 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.              
          § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bates in view of Torres.                
               Reference is made to the brief (paper number 10) and the               
          answer (paper number 11) for the respective positions of the                
          appellants and the examiner.                                                





                                          2                                           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007