Appeal No. 2005-0709
Application No. 09/767,197
representing a “key stroke pattern,” present a “pattern.”
But the instant claims go on to require that each key stroke
pattern is composed of “one or more stroke pattern directions
with each stroke pattern defined by a stroking of two or more
adjacent ones of said touch sensitive keys.” We fail to see how
one may conceivably contend that the pressing of a first and then
a second key in Smith indicates a “stroke pattern direction.” The
position of the second key may be in some particular “direction”
from the first key, but this is clearly not a “stroke pattern
direction,” as used in the instant claims, because the keys are
not stroked in a particular direction, e.g., like stroking the
bristles of a hairbrush in one direction or the other; but,
rather the keys in Smith are pressed individually. In our view,
“stroking,” as used in the instant claims, requires a continuous
movement of the user’s finger, or of whatever instrument is being
applied to the keys, between the adjacent keys.
The instant claims also define what is meant by a “stroke
pattern direction,” i.e., “a stroking of two or more adjacent
ones of said touch sensitive keys.”
Smith fails to suggest such a “stroke pattern direction
defined by a stroking of two or more adjacent ones of said touch
sensitive keys.” When Smith shows that the letter A is
-6-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007