Appeal No. 2006-0538
Application No. 09/827,957
display states for a user interface element. Independent claims
7, 11, 17 and 20 further recite that a so-called theme be
associated with a focus state and/or an operative state.
We do not agree with appellants’ apparent basic views that
figure 5 of Rock does not show testing operations for whether a
control is in an active or disabled state AND further testing of
the focus state of the control. It appears to us from figure 5
that a control may either be in an active or disabled state in
association with the cursor being over or away from a particular
control region as logically reflected in decision blocks 520 and
550. Correspondingly, each of those also have additional, second
logical requirements which are reflected in region 530 and 550
which determine whether a particular control region or all
control regions of a tool bar are dimmed or undimmed. The left
side of the figure appears to be much more logically explicit
indicating an active state of a cursor where it is over a control
region plus an active focus determination of an undimmed state,
thus fulfilling the additional requirements of the independent
claims of the merging or combined logical operation. The result
of this combined state is therefore rendered or otherwise
displayed according to Rock’s teachings in the requirements of
the independent claims on appeal.
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007