Appeal 2007-1436
Application 10/390,318
the relief in Diederiks, it is not the player’s own force which provides tactile
feedback to the player but rather it’s the physical movement of the relief generated
in response to the applied voltage which provides the feedback. (Findings of
Fact 8-9). It is clear from the record that Appellant’s claimed invention is directed
only to actuators whose physical movements are provided by some external force
exerted by a player (Appeal Br. 6-7 and Reply Br. 2-3). Although we agree with
the Examiner’s finding that the actuator of Diederiks provides tactile feedback to a
player’s finger when pressed by the player, we do not agree with the Examiner’s
finding that the actuator is moved in a direction normal to the top surface, by the
player’s own power, and that the physical movement of the actuator when the
actuator is pressed by the player provides the only tactile feedback to the player
from pressing the actuator. As such, we reverse the Examiner’s rejection of claims
1-9, 12-23, and 25.
REMAND
We remand this application to the Examiner for reconsideration, in view of
our interpretation of claim 1, of whether Mattice anticipates and/or renders obvious
the subject matter of claims 1-9, 12-23, and 25. Mattice discloses a gaming device
that includes one or more mechanical switches having switch activation surfaces
with changeable, controllable, or programmable indicia, such as characters, icons,
logos and the like (Finding of Fact 10). The gaming terminal 112 includes a
programmable display switch module 114, one or more other push-button type or
other mechanical switches 116 (which may be either fixed legend or programmable
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013