Appeal No. 2002-2023 Paper 31
Application No. 08/689,526 Page 5
pointer movement control actions further include a step of or means for stopping
pointer movement at a pointer location relative to the barrier. Therefore, we interpret
the phrase "providing predetermined pointer movement control actions responsive to
said compared pointer movement line with said barrier including the steps of changing
a speed of pointer movement responsive to said compared pointer movement line
with said barrier" to include pointer movement control actions which not only change
the speed at which the pointer is traveling, but also stopping its movement at the barrier.
Such an interpretation is consistent with both appellant's specification and claims.
B. Claim construction of the phrase "changing an orientation of the
pointer responsive to said compared pointer movement line with
said barrier."
According to appellant's specification, "pointer 300 is optionally oriented along
the direction of movement as indicated at a block 202 [in logic flow diagram Figure 2]"
(sentence bridging pp. 5-6). "[T]his technique can be used to effectively exaggerate the
spacing between screen elements, or prevent pointing at an element entered only
through one direction, such as through a door rather than just coasting onto it from any
direction. This completes the sequential steps as indicated at a block 214 [in Figure 2]."
[Id., p. 6, ¶ 1.] In addition, original dependent claims 5 and 12, respectively, broadly
recited a step of and apparatus means for "providing predetermined pointer movement
control actions responsive to said compared pointer movement line with said barriers
[which] includes the step of changing an orientation of the pointer" (id., pp. 9 and 10).
Original dependent claim 16 similarly recited a computer program product "wherein said
predetermined pointer movement control actions include[d] changing an orientation of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007