Appeal No. 2002-1971
Application 09/020,668
represent a hierarchical arrangement between the first and second
levels of abstraction."
The examiner finds that Lucas discloses a three-dimensional
workspace at column 4, lines 5-52 (R6; EA6). The examiner finds
that Lucas discloses maintaining the relative positioning of a
first information element, a document in the foreground of
Fig. 1, and a second information element, a document in the
background, in a three-dimensional workspace "based on the
hierarchical arrangement of document abstraction levels in
various 3D shapes" (R6; EA6).
This statement does not specifically identify what the
examiner considers to be the "the first and second user input
elements positioned within a three dimensional workspace."
Limitation (a) requires more than a three-dimensional workspace.
Claim 65 recites, in part, "(b) receiving a first
information element as user input to the first user input
element; (c) receiving a second information element as user input
to the second user input element."
The examiner acknowledges that Lucas does not disclose these
limitations, but concludes that they would have been obvious
because Lucas teaches that "[a]ny paper document can be entered
into the system by scanning" (col. 3, lines 53-54) (R6; EA7).
Appellant argues that this portion of Lucas does not suggest
receiving user input directed to first and second user input
- 10 -
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007