Appeal No. 2006-2736 Page 3 Application No. 10/038,167 a display unit connected to said imaging system and supplied with said image data for displaying an image containing said object dependent on said image data; and said imaging system allowing influencing of the display of said image on said display unit by a plurality of different control functions respectively uniquely associated with different predetermined movement directions of said mouse, said input device having a detector which detects a movement of said mouse in one of a said plurality of predetermined directions and said imaging system selecting the control function uniquely associated with said one of said plurality of said predetermined directions detected by said detector, to alter the display of said image on said display unit. Claims 1-4 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious over U.S. Patent No. 5,954,650 ("Saito") and U.S. Patent No. 6,461,298 ("Fenster"). Claim 5 stands rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Saito; Fenster; and U.S. Patent No. 6,725,215 ("Yamamoto"). Claim 6 stands rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Saito; Fenster; and U.S. Patent No. 6,259,382 ("Rosenberg"). Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under § 103(a) as obvious over Saito; Fenster; and U.S. Patent No. 6,601,055 ("Roberts"). II. OPINION "When multiple claims subject to the same ground of rejection are argued as a group by appellant, the Board may select a single claim from the group of claims that are argued together to decide the appeal with respect to the group of claims as to thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007