Appeal No. 2003-1371 Page 12
Application No. 09/186,856
corresponds to the view from the location of the second golf ball being hit by the
golfer 68." Id. at ll. 10-15. Because the display on the vertical screen is merged or split
in response to the location of the golf balls, we find that Curchod merges or splits a
display in response to players' locations in an electronic game.
D. MOTIVATION TO COMBINE NAKA, STAMPER, AND CURCHOD
Finding that "creating a better game with exciting graphics is key to success of
[a] game," (Examiner's Answer at 6), the examiner asserts, "it would have been obvious
. . . to combine Naka et al.'s [multiplayer electronic game] with Stamper et al.'s video
display system or Curchod's double position golf simulator for a better multiplayer
electronic games utilizing split screens." (Final Rejection at 5.) Although they do not
contest that creating a better game with exciting graphics is key to success of a game,
the appellants argue, "[i]f this were adequate evidence of incentive to combine
references, virtually every invention which is better than the prior art would be obvious
provided that all of the individual elements could be found in the prior art." (Reply Br. at
3-4.)
"The presence or absence of a motivation to combine references in an
obviousness determination is a pure question of fact." In re Gartside, 203 F3d 1305,
1316, 53 USPQ2d 1769, 1776 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (citing In re Dembiczak, 175 F.3d 994,
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007