Appeal No. 2002-2023 Paper 31
Application No. 08/689,526 Page 8
Claims 1-3, 6-10 and 13-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Kanamaru in view of Keyson and McCambridge.
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellant's specification and claims and to the respective positions articulated by the
appellant and the examiner. We make reference to the examiner's answer ("Answer,"
Paper 25, mailed August 27, 2001) for the examiner's reasoning in support of the
rejection and to the appellant's brief ("Brief," Paper 24, filed June 13, 2001) and reply
brief ("Reply," Paper 26, filed January 11, 2002) for the appellant's arguments
thereagainst.
VII. The prior art
A. Kanamaru
Kanamaru discloses a cursor moving system, the cursor being moved by a
pointing device such as a mouse, which is capable of (i) reducing the distance the
mouse must travel to move the cursor, (ii) moving the cursor into either an adjacent or a
separated designated area and (iii) stopping the cursor when it reaches a boundary of a
designated area (c. 1, ll. 7-23; c. 3, ll. 30-32; c. 6, ll. 4-55). Kanamaru Figure 4
illustrates a screen display of a computer/data processing system 2a showing three
separate overlapping windows numbered 1, 2 and 3 from front to back in the body of the
display and five icons numbered 1-5 in a vertical row on the right hand side of the
display. Kanamaru Figure 4 is said to illustrate the cursor moving system using three
examples or "cases" (c. 6, ll. 4-11), assuming "that an operator has previously made a
request for the discontinuous traveling of the cursor" (c. 6, ll. 11-13). Kanamaru
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007