The opinion in support of the decision being entered today was not written
for publication and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 12
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte EDWARD R. HARRISON, ALYSON R. MILLER,
JAMES W. LUNDELL and CINDY L. MERRILL
____________
Appeal No. 2004-0945
Application No. 09/605,929
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before FLEMING, SAADAT and NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judges.
SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the Examiner’s final
rejection of claims 1-15, which are all of the claims pending in
this application.
We reverse.
BACKGROUND
Appellants’ invention is directed to scrolling multiple
frames that make up a web page display. According to Appellants,
using conventional mechanical scrolling devices creates ambiguity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007