Appeal No. 2004-0975
Application No. 09/793,595
Rather than repeat the positions of the appellant and the examiner,
reference is made to the brief and reply brief for the appellant’s positions,
and to the answer for the examiner’s positions.
OPINION
For the reasons generally set forth by appellant in the brief and reply
brief, we reverse each of the separately stated rejections under 35 U.S.C. §
103 of the claims on appeal.
In relying upon Cortopassi at page 4 of the answer, the examiner
recognizes that this reference does not explicitly teach the feature of each
of the independent claims 11, 19 and 23 of sending less than all of the
display output from the first computer to the portable computer. Our own
review of this lengthy reference leads us to the same conclusion. The
examiner’s position even recognizes this statement at column 1, lines 52-
54 that “[o]nce connected, the wireless interface device, which includes a
display, takes control of the host computer and mirrors whatever is being
displayed on the host computer on its display.” This statement is
essentially repeated at column 54, lines 24-26, where it is stated that “[a]s
mentioned above, the display 113C on the wireless interface device 100
-3-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007