Appeal No. 2004-1254
Application No. 09/625,884
Arguably, with the modernization of slot machines, it may
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to update
Fey’s Rock-A-Way machine by using a video screen as taught by
Ugawa instead of a mechanical system. Even as so modified,
however, the Fey machine still would not respond to the above
noted limitations in independent claims 1, 7, 11, 13, 17 and 22
relating to the repositioning of the plurality of images as a
unit in a coordinated manner to simulate movement of the entire
video screen. The collective disclosures of Fey and Ugawa simply
do not teach, and would not have suggested, this feature. The
examiner’s attempt to overcome this deficiency by analogizing
Fey’s circular wheel to a video screen is not well taken as the
wheel would constitute but a portion of the display shown on the
video screen of the ROCK-A-WAY machine as modified in view of
Ugawa. Hence, rocking movement of the wheel on the video screen
would not simulate movement of the entire video screen.
Thus, the combined teachings of Fey and Ugawa do not justify
the examiner’s conclusion that the differences between the
subject matter recited in independent claims 1, 7, 11, 13, 17 and
22 and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole
would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
person having ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, we shall not
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007