Appeal 2007-0761
Application 09/907,610
Findings with respect to the rejection of claims 9 and 21 for being obvious
over Kennelly in view of Mullaney under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
8. Examiner’s reference Mullaney teaches a user interface in which a choice
of languages can be made by the user “by navigating a graphical pointer
over a pushbutton … and clicking with a mouse, keyboard or the like …
.” (Col 4, l. 45). The actual language control indicators are “stored as a
single bitmap for ease of retrieval”. (Col 4, l. 38).
Findings with respect to the rejection of claim 10 for being obvious over
Kennelly in view of Sameth under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
9. Sameth teaches a multi-language user interface for a system designed to
teach languages. In addition to text, Sameth offers audio files in the
respective languages. Sameth has been added as a secondary teaching to
supplement Kennelly by showing that audio files in multi-language
systems are old in the prior art. Appellants argue that there is no
motivation to include this teaching with Kennelly. (Brief 25).
10. We find that Kennelly and Sameth are both addressing the same field of
endeavor, multi-language GUIs. (See the respective references.).
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
On appeal, Appellants bears the burden of showing that the Examiner
has not established a legally sufficient basis for the rejection of the claims.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013