Appeal No. 2004-2363 Page 8
Application No. 09/224,211
the document to scroll in the indicated direction), the scroll bar does have functionality
not included in up and down buttons (e.g., one can quickly move to any part of a
document by dragging the scroll box to the corresponding part of the scroll bar). Due to
this difference in functionality, the removal of a scroll bar from the user interface and the
addition of up and down buttons to the user interface as taught by Okada does result in
Okada changing an existing collection of user interface controls by adding or removing
a user interface control to the existing collection of user interface controls. Accordingly,
the appellants argument does not persuade us the claims 7 and 8 are patentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103 over the combined teachings of Moody and Okada.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 7
and 8 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed.
In the brief (p. 4), the appellants grouped claims 7 and 35 together and grouped
claims 8 and 36 together. Thereby, in accordance with 37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7), claim 35
falls with claim 7 and claim 36 falls with claim 8.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007