Appeal No. 2004-0257
Application No. 09/296,724
to the applicant to overcome the prima facie case with argument
and/or evidence. Obviousness is then determined on the basis of
the evidence as a whole and the relative persuasiveness of the
arguments. See Id.; In re Hedges, 783 F.2d 1038, 1039, 228 USPQ
685, 686 (Fed. Cir. 1986); In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468, 1472,
223 USPQ 785, 788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d
1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). Only those arguments
actually made by appellant have been considered in this decision.
Arguments which appellant could have made but chose not to make
in the brief have not been considered and are deemed to be waived
[see 37 CFR 1.192 (a)].
With regard to independent claim 1, the examiner relies on
Fults to teach an application module interconnected to a user
interface controller module that is arranged for generating a
pull request to said application module. The application module
is arranged for a demand driven organization outputting user
interface elements to the user interface controller module as
indicated by a request. The user interface controller module is
arranged for deciding which GUI elements will be rendered and
then how and when they will be structured. For support of these
-4-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007