Appeal No. 2003-1480
Application No. 09/127,442
Therefore, the additional point 501, together with the start
and end points 511 and 521, are used to correct or alter the
movement characteristics (such as velocity) of the object moving
along path 500 on the display screen and read on the claimed
“handles along said path.” Watanabe further discloses that by
changing the velocity vector from velocity 502 to velocity 503 at
point 501, a new path 504 defines the new motion path (col. 6,
lines 52-55) which reads on the claimed “controlling a velocity
of said object.”
In view of the discussion above, Watanabe discloses all the
claimed elements and therefore, anticipates the independent
claims. Accordingly, we find that claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 are
unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102 over Watanabe.
In addition to reversing the Examiner’s decision rejecting
the claims, this decision contains a new ground of rejection
pursuant to 37 CFR § 41.50(b) (effective September 13, 2004, 69
Fed. Reg. 49960 (August 12, 2004), 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21
(September 7, 2004)). 37 CFR § 41.50(b) provides "[a] new ground
of rejection pursuant to this paragraph shall not be considered
final for judicial review."
37 CFR § 41.50(b) also provides that the appellant, WITHIN
TWO MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION, must exercise one of
the following two options with respect to the new ground of
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007