Appeal No. 2002-1041 Application 08/866,402 Obviousness Initially, it is noted that only claim 24 recites a touch screen display, so Greanias is only relevant to claim 24. The "position sensing subsystem for providing signals indicating that an area on the display has been selected by an operator" in claims 20, 26, and 31 reads on the ordinary computer subsystem for sensing the position of a cursor or pointer which is clearly present in Volk. The analysis is limited to Volk except for the rejection of claim 24. Claim 20 The argued differences are altering the visual representation of the selected key "by enlarging said the visual representation and by changing said visual representation to have the appearance of a depressed key." Appellants argue that the examiner relies on a general language in Volk suggesting that a programmer can enable any change of appearance that the programmer chooses, but this does not teach the precise changes in display that are claimed (Br10-11). We agree that the rejection, as stated, seems to rely on general language in Volk and is not persuasive for that reason. Nevertheless, Volk does have specific relevant teachings which cannot be ignored. For example, the examiner did refer to Fig. 8A in the rejection (Paper No. 13) and the final rejection - 6 -Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007