Ex Parte Barton et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 5, 2012

10891784 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 5, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
10/891,784 07/15/2004 Kristopher J. Barton MICR0503 1288
27792 7590 03/05/2012
RONALD M. ANDERSON
MICROSOFT CORPORATION
600 108TH AVENUE N.E., SUITE 507
BELLEVUE, WA 98004
EXAMINER
FABER, DAVID
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2177
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/05/2012 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte KRISTOPHER J. BARTON, AARON D. MANDELBAUM, and
TISHA A. ABASTILLAS

___________

Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784
Technology Center 2100
____________

Before ROBERT E. NAPPI, DAVID M. KOHUT, and ERIC B. CHEN,
Administrative Patent Judges.

CHEN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

2
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the non-final
rejection of claims 1-40, all the claims pending in the application. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants’ invention relates to a spreadsheet containing editable data
cells arranged in a page layout view. A user can enter and revise data in the
individual cells and manipulate the format of the spreadsheet in the page
layout view. Page layout parameters such as page size, orientation and
margins are determined so that a rectangle is formed to model the page
layout parameters. A border of the rectangle represents margins of the page.
The number of cells that fit inside the area surrounded by the rectangle
border is superimposed onto the rectangle. (Abstract.)
Claim 1 is exemplary, with disputed limitations in italics:
1. A method for displaying a page layout view of a spreadsheet
application to present a spreadsheet as it will appear in a printable form,
while still enabling editing of data cell content, comprising the steps of:
(a) determining page layout parameters of a printable page using
current settings of the spreadsheet application, the page layout parameters
including:
(i) a page size;
(ii) a page orientation; and
(iii) page margins;
(b) forming a rectangle incorporating the page layout parameters of
the printable page, the rectangle including:
(i) a rectangle perimeter representing outer dimensions of the
page size;
(ii) a rectangle orientation representing the page orientation;
and
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

3
(iii) a rectangle border area within the rectangle perimeter, the
rectangle border area representing the page margins;
(c) determining a cell area available for presenting editable data cells
in a single view corresponding to the printable page, the cell area including
an area of the rectangle surrounded by the rectangle border area;
(d) automatically determining a plurality of editable data cells that
can be fitted within the cell area, wherein the automatically determining is
performed by a computer without a user specifying page breaks;
(e) automatically inserting the plurality of editable data cells within
the cell area of the rectangle; and
(f) generating the rectangle for display on the printable page, wherein
the editable data cells in the cell area are editable in the displayed
rectangle.
Claims 1-40 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious
over Microsoft Excel1 (Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Excel 2000
(1999)) and Microsoft Word2 (Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Word 2000
(1999)).
ANALYSIS
Claims 1-20
We are not persuaded by Appellants’ arguments (Br. 12-14) that the
combination of Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Word would not have
rendered independent claim 1 obvious, which includes the disputed
limitations “(d) automatically determining a plurality of editable data cells

1 As evidence, the Examiner provided screenshots from Microsoft Excel,
annotated as: (i) “SS0” to “SS13” (dated Jun. 29, 2006), (ii) “MEPage1”
(dated Jun. 29, 2006) and (iii) “SS3A” and “SS3B” (dated May 25, 2007).
2 As evidence, the Examiner provided screenshots from Microsoft Word,
annotated as: (i) “MWSS0” to “MWSS2C” (dated Jun. 29, 2006), (ii)
“MWPage1” to “MWPage5” (dated Jun. 29, 2006), (iii) “MWPage6” to
“MWPage9” (dated May 25, 2007) and (iv) “MWSS3A” to MWSS3I”
(dated Nov. 14, 2007).
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

4
that can be fitted within the cell area” and “(f) generating the rectangle for
display on the printable page, wherein the editable data cells in the cell area
are editable in the displayed rectangle.”
The Examiner found that the “Page Break Preview” view of Microsoft
Excel that includes the ability to edit cells in this view corresponds to the
disputed limitations “(d) automatically determining a plurality of editable
data cells that can be fitted within the cell area” and “(f) generating the
rectangle for display on the printable page, wherein the editable data cells in
the cell area are editable in the displayed rectangle.” (Ans. 4-5; see also
Microsoft Excel, “SS2”, “SS3”, “SS3A” and “SS3B.”) The Examiner
acknowledged that Microsoft Excel does not disclose the limitation “a
rectangle border area within the rectangle perimeter” (i.e., step (b)(iii)) and,
therefore, cited Microsoft Word 2000. The Examiner concluded that:
[i]t would have been obvious . . . to [have] modified Microsoft Excel
2000’s application to include Microsoft Word 2000’s ability to view
page margins in a print layout view while able [to] edit content since
it would have provided the benefit of being useful to see where the
page margins, able to adjust the page margins, and set the margins
while still able to add data without changing page views.
(Ans. 6-7.) We agree with the Examiner.
Microsoft Excel provides the following:
Check whether a print area is defined[.] If the worksheet contains
a print area, Microsoft Excel prints only the print area. To determine
whether your worksheet contains a print area, click Page Break
Preview on the View menu. The area of the worksheet that appears
with a white background is the area that is printed.
(Microsoft Excel, “MEPage1” (emphasis in original).) The Microsoft Excel
screenshots provided by the Examiner illustrate that upon selection of the
“Page Break Preview,” a vertical dashed line and a horizontal dashed line
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

5
(i.e., print borders) are generated, corresponding to the limitation “(d)
automatically determining a plurality of editable data cells that can be fitted
within the cell area.” (See Microsoft Excel, “SS2” and “SS3.”) The
Microsoft Excel screenshots further illustrate that cell “H48” can be edited
(e.g., the font style of cell “H48” has been converted to “bold”) while in the
“Page Break Preview” view, corresponding to the limitation “(f) generating
the rectangle for display on the printable page, wherein the editable data
cells in the cell area are editable in the displayed rectangle.” (See Microsoft
Excel, “SS3A” and “SS3B.”)
Microsoft Word explains that “[working] in print layout view
[provides the ability] to see how text, graphics, and other elements will be
positioned on the printed page” and that “[t]his view is useful for editing
headers and footers, for adjusting margins, and for working with columns
and drawing objects.” (Microsoft Word, “MWPage1.”) Microsoft Word
further provides that:
Word provides several ways to insert Microsoft Excel data into a
Word document. For example, you can easily copy and paste a
worksheet or chart. Or you can insert the worksheet or chart as a
linked object or embedded object. The main differences between
linking and embedding are where the data is stored and how it is
updated after you place it in the document . . . .
(Microsoft Word, “MWPage6.”)
Thus, incorporating features from Microsoft Word into the
spreadsheet of Microsoft Excel would improve Microsoft Excel by
providing the ability to adjust margins. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007). Furthermore, Microsoft Word expressly states
that “Word provides several ways to insert Microsoft Excel data into a Word
document.” (Microsoft Word, “MWPage6.”) Thus, we agree with the
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

6
Examiner (Ans. 6-7) that modifying Microsoft Excel to include the ability to
adjust margins, as taught by Microsoft Word, would have been obvious.
First, Appellants argue that “the cited portions of MS Word 2000 only
disclose a page preview mode in which Word data is displayed and is
editable” but “the Word data that is displayed or is editable does not
represent an editable data cell (a construct in a spreadsheet application
which is very different from Word Processing data as would be recognized
by those skilled in the art).” (Br. 12:27-31 (emphasis in original).)
However, the Examiner has provided persuasive evidence in the form of
Microsoft Word screenshots that includes inserted Microsoft Excel data and
the Examiner has demonstrated that such data is editable. (See Microsoft
Word, “MWSS3A” to “MWSS3I”; Ans. 20-21.) Appellants have not
provided any persuasive arguments or rebuttal evidence to address why the
Microsoft Word screenshots provided by the Examiner is not proper.
Second, Appellants argue that the combination of Microsoft Excel
and Microsoft Word fail to “show the claimed feature in which the
generated spreadsheet rectangle for display on a printable page include
editable data cells that are editable in the displayed rectangle and
furthermore includes an automatically determined plurality of editable
data cells that can be fitted within a cell area.” (Br. 13:2-6 (emphasis in
original).) However, as discussed previously, the Microsoft Excel
screenshots illustrate that upon selection of the “Page Break Preview” to
view the print area, a vertical dashed line and a horizontal dashed line (i.e.,
print borders) are automatically generated. (See Microsoft Excel, “SS2”,
“SS3” and “MEPage1.”) Also discussed previously, the Microsoft Word
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

7
screenshots illustrate that data from an inserted Microsoft Excel worksheet is
editable. (See Microsoft Word, “MWSS3A” to “MWSS3I.”)
Third, Appellants argue that “any changes to the spreadsheet data
would have to be made in separately in Excel and hence could not be made
within the page layout view of Word” and thus, “the actual combination of
cited portions of MS Word 2000 and MS Excel 2000 teaches away from the
features recited in the pending independent claim 1.” (Br. 13:9-12
(emphasis in original).) However, as discussed previously, the Examiner has
provided persuasive evidence in the form of Microsoft Word screenshots
that includes inserted Microsoft Excel data and the Examiner has
demonstrated that such data is editable. (See Microsoft Word, “MWSS3A”
to “MWSS3I”; Ans. 20-21.)
Last, Appellants argues that:
simply adding or replacing the print preview of MS Word 2000 into
MS Excel 2000 would render this feature in MS Excel 2000
unsuitable for use since the complex relationships between the data
cells of the spreadsheets would not be accounted for in the page
display and the editing would thus be erroneous . . . .
(Br. 14:4-7 (emphasis in original)). However, the rejection of independent
claim 1 is based on importing a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet into a
Microsoft Word document. (Ans. 6, 20-21.)
Thus, we agree with the Examiner that the combination of Microsoft
Excel and Microsoft Word would have rendered obvious independent
claim 1, which includes the limitations “(d) automatically determining a
plurality of editable data cells that can be fitted within the cell area” and “(f)
generating the rectangle for display on the printable page, wherein the
editable data cells in the cell area are editable in the displayed rectangle.”
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

8
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of independent claim 1 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Claims 2-20 depend from independent claim 1, and
Appellants have not presented any substantive arguments with respect to
these claims. Therefore, we sustain the rejection of claims 2-20 under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the same reasons discussed with respect to
independent claim 1.
Claims 21-40
Although Appellants nominally argue the rejection of independent
claims 21 and 33 separately (Br. 15-16), the arguments presented do not
point out with particularity or explain why the limitations of the dependent
claims are separately patentable. Instead, Appellants argue that “a prima
facie case of obviousness has not been established [for independent claim 1]
with the cited art, since specific recited features . . . are not disclosed by the
relied-upon references” (Br. 15:20-22, 16:19-21) and there is “no motivation
to modify MS Excel 2000 based upon MS Word 2000 . . . due to their
dissimilar nature” (Br. 15:22-24, 16:21-22). We are not persuaded by these
arguments for the reasons discussed with respect to independent claim 1.
Accordingly, we sustain the rejection of independent claims 21 and 33
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). Claims 22-32 and 34-40 depend from
independent claims 21 and 33, and Appellants have not presented any
substantive arguments with respect to these claims. Therefore, we sustain
the rejection of claims 22-32 and 34-40 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the
same reasons discussed with respect to independent claims 21 and 33.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1-40 is affirmed.
Appeal 2009-014003
Application 10/891,784

9
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED

rwk