Appeal 2007-2127
Reexamination Control No. 90/006,621
does not disclose or suggest emitting an "error message" upon detection of
an error, the rejection of claims 40, 43, 49, 55, 56, and 61 is reversed.
4. Cursor movement, screen scroll, and line deletion
Krantz does not expressly disclose "control procedures including
cursor movement, screen scroll and line deletion" (Finding 18). The
Examiner finds (Final Rejection 141-42 ¶ VIII.6) that Krantz discloses that a
background application can be running "while the user has a text editor in
the foreground where a memo is being typed in" (page 15) and "[t]he user
could then type in the needed information while the program is actually
executing" (page 20). Although not expressly stated, the rejection implies
that it would have been obvious to provide "cursor movement, screen scroll
and line deletion" in the text editor of Krantz because these were well-
known text editor features.
We do not find where Patent Owner addresses this limitation. We
conclude that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
provide "cursor movement, screen scroll and line deletion" as part of a text
editor in Krantz because these features were common and well-known text
editor features. The objective evidence has been considered supra, and is
entitled to no weight. In addition, the objective evidence dealing with
spelling and grammar checking has nothing to do with the text editor
limitations. The rejection of claims 41, 42, and 51 is affirmed.
5. General lexical and syntactic analysis
Krantz does not disclose checking code or words "for conformity"
with the language (Finding 19), "lexical and syntactic analyses for parsing
112
Page: Previous 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013