Appeal No. 2003-1866
Application 08/839,361
as claimed. Since, as previously discussed with regard to
claim 9, Fredlund is not needed for a proper rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a), we sustain the Examiner’s obviousness
rejection of claim 33 based solely on the combination of Kristy
and Yamamoto.
We also sustain the Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejection,
in which Truc is added to Kristy, of independent claims 34 and
42, which also are directed to the thumbnail image selection
feature discussed above with regard to claim 33. Although the
Examiner has added Truc to the Kristy reference as the basis for
the rejection, it is our view, for all of the reasons discussed
above with regard to claim 33, that Truc is not needed for a
proper rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Accordingly, we
sustain the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claims 34 and 42
based on Kristy alone.
Turning to a consideration of claims 35 and 36, we sustain
the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of these claims as well
based on Kristy alone. Although Appellants have grouped these
claims along with claims 34 and 42 which include limitations
directed to selection of thumbnail images, claims 35 and 36
12
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007