Appeal No. 2003-0276
Application 09/432,750
Reference is made to the briefs (paper numbers 11 and 13)
and the answer (paper number 12) for the respective positions of
the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will sustain the obviousness rejection of claims 1, 2
and 5, and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 3
and 4.
Grimmett recognizes that keyboards are used in many types of
devices to transfer information from a person to a device (e.g.,
a typewriter, a word processor, a teletype, a data organizer and
a computer) (page 1), and that the QWERTY keyboard layout is
wasteful, inefficient and confusing to a keyboarder (page 2).
Grimmett discloses an alphabetic keyboard arrangement as an
alternative to the standard QWERTY keyboard arrangement
(Figures 1 and 2). We agree with the appellant’s argument
(brief, pages 3 through 10; reply brief, pages 1 through 3) that
Grimmett states that it is desirable to use the two letters “I”
and “Q” to delineate the starting letters of the second and third
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007