Appeal No. 2005-0742
Application No. 10/274,579
displaying a representation of evaluation status for each of a
plurality of computation rules as well as a corresponding display
and operation of at least one combining policy.
Moreover, we generally agree with appellants’ observations
at pages 8 and 9 of the principal brief on appeal as applicable
to claim 4, which remarks more clearly state the issue with
respect to this claim on appeal. Because appellants’ remarks
here relate to the actual text at column 37 of Shasha relating to
the various subfigures forming figure 20, those features relied
upon by the examiner do not appear to be displayed anyway. The
statement relied upon by the examiner at the top of column 8
(lines 5-9) does not appear to actually teach what the examiner
asserts. This portion of Shasha merely indicates that each
conditional transition network represents a data or information
pattern, whereas it is the additional teaching that any portion
of the data or information pattern may be displayed on a visual
display screen by the display mapping process shown in figure 2.
The (internal) states of the conditional transition network
10 itself do not appear to be displayed.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007