Appeal No. 2006-1766
Application No. 09/773,090
able to interact with text displayed on display 108.
Accordingly, assert appellants, since display 108 only appears to
provide prompts or information to a user, and there is no
component that allows the user to interact with display 108,
Karidis does not disclose a second text editing unit having a
“second screen” upon which text may be displayed, and “a second
manual actuator” by means of which a user is able “to interact
with text displayed on the second screen,” as required by the
language of claim 1.
Moreover, appellants argue that Kashiwagi does not make up
for the admitted deficiency of Karidis in failing to disclose or
suggest that text selected from a first document displayed on one
unit is to be inserted directly at a predetermined location in a
document displayed on the other unit. In particular, appellants
contend that in each of the twelve embodiments described in
Kashiwagi, a user is allowed to modify a document through the use
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007