Ex Parte Brandt et al - Page 9

                Appeal 2007-1050                                                                               
                Application 10/058,360                                                                         


                relational and positional sense.  In addition to these advantages, the patent to               
                Berry characterizes the help as meaningful, providing less confusion to the                    
                user and certainly providing a friendlier user interface.  These same                          
                principals are summarized at column 6, lines 58 through 60 of Berry.                           
                      Dazey provides corresponding teachings and showings in figures 4                         
                through 6 and their corresponding columnar discussions.  At the same time                      
                as information is displayed in an application environment in work space 50                     
                of figure 4, the help pane 70 is displayed to the right when requested by the                  
                user.  Of particular note here is the capability of activating the table of                    
                contents button 80 and/or the show index button 90 in figures 4 through 6.                     
                The index to help content information is illustrated, as relied upon by the                    
                Examiner, as element 92 in figure 6.  The advantages are set forth in the                      
                Summary of the Invention at column 2 and summarized in the paragraph at                        
                the bottom of column 6 of Dazey.  In fact, the discussion in the Summary of                    
                the Invention at column 2, lines 25 through 28 indicate that the use of a help                 
                pane avoids the use of hidden application windows when a help pane has                         
                been used in the prior art, thus obviating the disadvantages of the prior art                  
                noted in the Background of the Invention at column 1.                                          
                      Appellants’ references to the background discussion at column 1 of                       
                Dazey at pages 17 and 18 of the principal Brief on appeal and at pages 2 and                   
                3 of the Reply Brief, presented to us in context of teaching away from the                     
                proposed combination, are clearly misplaced.  The discussion at column 1 of                    
                Dazey is not to be attributed to the teachings of Dazey per se, whereas                        
                Dazey plainly teaches that those are known disadvantages in the art                            
                discussed at column 1 that his invention addresses and overcomes.  Rather                      

                                                      9                                                        

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013