Reexamination Control No. 90/005,742
Patent 5,253,341
1 step (e): "wherein said displaying step occurs repeatedly in response to one or more commands
2 inputted to said remote query and data retrieval system." The examiner correctly reads this
3 limitation on column 11, line 65 to column 12, line 20 (3d Action at 98, para. 37; Final Action at
4 252), which lines explain that the commands at the user's disposal during a viewing session
5 include a command to repeat a frame. Pocock, col. 12, ll. 13-16. We also note Pocock's
6 disclosure that "[t]he stored frame is continually retransmitted from the terminal 14 to the
7 viewer's television receiver 36 for display as a still frame." Pocock, col. 4, ll. 20-23. Dr.
8 Koopman's discussion (2d Koopman Decl. at 189, para. 408) of this claim does not deny that the
9 limitation recited in step (e) reads on Pocock.
10 The rejection of claim 102 for anticipation by Pocock is affirmed.
11 Claim 104 repeats the preamble and paragraphs (a) to (d) of claim 93 and recites as paragraph
12 (e): "wherein said remote query and data retrieval means further comprises a removable bulk
13 storage device containing data that is accessed and displayed based on said compressed or non-
14 compressed response to said query." The examiner reads this limitation on column 18, lines 4-
15 23 of Pocock. 3d Action at 99, para. 38; Final Action at 252-53, para. 37. Lines 6-8 of column
16 18 explain it may be desirable to attach a memory unit, such as a CD ROM, to store fixed
17 information at the user terminal. Dr. Koopman's discussion (2d Koopman Decl. at 189-90,
18 para. 411) of this rejection does not deny that paragraph (e) reads on Pocock.
19 The rejection of claim 104 for anticipation by Pocock is therefore affirmed.
20 (2) Claims 95 and 98 -- obvious over Pocock in view of Catros?
- 74 -
Page: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007