Appeal No. 2005-0709
Application No. 09/767,197
the instant invention being different from, and unobvious over,
Smith’s disclosure.
Each of the instant independent claims 1, 22, 43, and 46
requires a “stroke pattern direction” with “each stroke pattern
direction defined by a stroking of two or more adjacent ones of
said touch sensitive keys.” While appellants distinguish a
“keystroke” from a “stroking” of a key by defining the former as
a “strike” or a “pressing” of a key, with the latter not
requiring the user to depress a key, but merely to caress the key
to indicate direction, the examiner gives a broad meaning to the
term “stroking.”
While we agree with the examiner that “stroking” a key may
broadly include a depression of a key, the claims require more
than this. The claims call for “key stroking patterns.”
Smith represents a character by a two stroke pictographic
figure, where a first stroke proceeds from the position of a
first key pressed to the center of the keypad, while a second
stroke proceeds from the center of the keypad to the position of
the second key to be pressed. It might broadly be said that if
the pressing of a key is, broadly, a stroke, then Smith may be
broadly interpreted as teaching a “key stroking pattern,” as the
first and second keys to be pressed, each set of two keys
-5-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007