Appeal No. 2002-1258
Application No. 09/148,551
1444, 221 USPQ 385, 388 (Fed. Cir. 1984); cert. dismissed, 468 U.S. 1228 (1984);
W.L. Gore and Assoc., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1554, 220 USPQ 303, 313
(Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
With regard to independent claim 12, this claim calls for a geographical
information display having a first display area for graphical representations, a second
display area for presentation of textual geographical information, a user input means,
and something responsive to the user input means to control the information presented
by the first and second display areas.
The examiner, at page 6 of the answer, cites “features of software application
note figure 11A col. 5 lines 18-28" as the sole reasoning for the rejection and the
application of the Israni reference to the instant claimed subject matter.
Not only has the examiner failed to establish a one-to-one correspondence
between the instant claimed elements and that which is disclosed by Israni, but our
review of those cited portions of Israni finds nothing indicative of what is claimed by
appellant. Figure 11A shows a map display area with a parcel having cells, along with
intersecting cells. This figure is an illustration showing a subdivision of cartographic
data in a process. We find nothing therein indicative of two display areas, one for
graphical data and one for textual information. We also find nothing in Figure 11A of
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007