Appeal No. 2004-2363 Page 7
Application No. 09/224,211
examiner relies on Okada for such disclosure; (2) Okada merely converts the
presentation format for several elements of a user interface, without adding or removing
elements from the user interface; and (3) Okada fails to change an existing collection of
user interface controls by adding or removing a user interface control to the existing
collection of user interface controls.
The test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of the references would
have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Young, 927 F.2d 588, 591,
18 USPQ2d 1089, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 1991) and In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ
871, 881 (CCPA 1981).
In our view, the combined teachings of Moody and Okada would have made it
obvious at the time the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
have modified the method and system of Moody to include either scroll bars or up and
down buttons as suggested and taught by Okada based on the user's age group and
occupation as taught by Moody. For example, adults would be provided with scroll bars
and children would be provided with up and down buttons. While a scroll bar2 does
have functionality included in up and down buttons (i.e., , clicking on the arrows causes
2 A scroll bar has arrows at either end, a gray or colored area in the middle, and a scroll box (or
elevator) that moves from one end to the other to reflect your position in the document.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007