Appeal No. 2006-1093
Application No. 09/842,471
do not sustain the examiner's rejection of dependent claims 2-16, 18-32, and 34-
46.
We reach an opposite conclusion, however, with respect to independent
claims 47, 50, and 53. These claims call for, in pertinent part, predicting a
destination point icon by comparing a motion vector imparted by a user to a
pointing cursor to a previously acquired motion vector acquired from the user
moving the cursor. Claims 47, 50, and 53, however, do not require storing a set
of motion vectors and the first destination position referenced to the first source
position as discussed above in connection with independent claims 1, 17, and
33.
At the outset, we note that merely moving a cursor from one point to
another fully meets the limitation reciting a “motion vector imparted by a user to a
pointing cursor.” That is, when a user moves a cursor from one point to another
(i.e., from a source to a destination), it is necessarily vector movement because
vectors with a definite magnitude and direction are established between at least
two successive points along the cursor’s path of travel. Thus, as a user moves
the cursor along a path, new vectors are continually created using the cursor’s
current coordinate and its immediately-preceding coordinate. Moreover,
determining a change in direction of a particular path taken by the cursor
necessarily requires comparing not only coordinates along the path, but also
vectors created between those coordinates.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007