Appeal No. 2003-0237
Application No. 09/157,895
contains the “text-based characterization” of output
device and meets the broad claim limitation.
The portions of Shaw relied upon by the examiner disclose
that the minidriver contains data characterizing the output
device, but do not disclose that the characterization is text
based. The examiner’s argument indicates that Shaw discloses a
“text based minidriver”, “text based characterization” and “text
data”, but those disclosures are not in the reference.
We therefore find that the examiner has not carried the
burden of establishing a prima facie case of anticipation of the
inventions claimed in the appellants’ claims 1 and 11.
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of these claims and
claims 2-4, 6-10 and 12-17 that depend therefrom.
Claims 18 and 20
The appellants’ claim 18 requires creating, using a text
editor, a text based minidriver containing a text based
characterization of a printer device, and claim 20 requires
opening a minidriver in a text editor, modifying the minidriver,
and saving the minidriver in the text editor.
Millman discloses a system for designing complex, graphics-
based forms and then generating control specifications for
producing the forms on a production scale basis (col. 1,
lines 12-16). The portion of Millman (col. 5, lines 44-60;
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007