Appeal No.2002-1765
Application No. 09/182,091
levels are assigned to each memory operation, but Lewchuk clearly does not provide
for a memory manager “for communicating a representation of the information set to
the selected portion of said graphical user interface display” and “determining whether
the information set includes information of a first type or information of a second type,”
as required by independent claims 1 and 9.
Still further, even if Barker and Lewchuk disclosed what is alleged by the
examiner, the examiner has provided nothing that would have led the artisan to
combine these references in any manner, let alone the manner set forth in the instant
claims.
We find nothing in the combination of Barker and Lewchuk suggesting the use of
a memory manager using a first information processing mode to control display of
information in the selected portion of a graphical user interface when an information set
is of a first type and using a second information processing mode to control the display
of the information set in the selected portion of the graphical user interface when the
information set is of a second type.
Motai, applied in combination with Barker and Lewchuk, for a teaching of “an
image display apparatus that displays images and messages which are changed with
elapse of time,” in a rejection of claim 4, does nothing to remedy the deficiencies of
Barker and Lewchuk.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007