Appeal No. 2003-2010
Application 09/150,549
lines 12-19). Thus, we agree with the examiner that creating a
tool corresponding to a recorded macro meets the limitation of
"specifying a predefined process within said data processing
system said predefined process comprising a plurality of
keystrokes, said plurality of keystrokes specifying a user
defined executable process which may be applied to one or more
objects within said data processing system" and appellants have
not said why it does not. Buxton discloses that the cursor can
be put into a tool mode corresponding to that tool and that users
can perform operations as though they were clicking through that
tool (col. 26, lines 1-5). The tool can be any tool including a
tool created by recording a macro. Putting the cursor into a
tool mode meets the limitation of "associating said predefined
process with said movable cursor within said data processing
system in response to a first user input." Claim 1 does not
recite how the cursor association is enabled and disabled.
Although the examiner found that Buxton did not clearly teach
disabling the association, we find that Buxton expressly teaches
that the user uses a button to place the cursor into a tool mode
(col. 26, lines 1-3) and to exit the mode (col. 26, lines 17-19)
or that getting in and out of the modes can be done with a
gesture, such a double clicking (col. 26, lines 19-22). Although
not recited in claim 1, we note that Buxton discloses that "[t]he
cursor could take a shape similar to that of the tool as a
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007