decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I am certain because I read the claim (WARNING MAY CONTAIN CLAIM LANGUAGE) | 393 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I am certain because I read the claim (WARNING MAY CONTAIN CLAIM LANGUAGE)
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 10 2013 @ 04:16 PM EDT
The claim in question is presented below. I have used --- to bracket the
important bit as I find successfully using HTML here tedious and next to
impossible.


19. (original) A device, comprising:
a touch screen display;
one or more processors;
memory; and one or more programs,
wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be
executed by the one or more processors, the programs including:

instructions for displaying a first portion of an electronic document;

instructions for detecting a movement of an object on or near the touch screen
display;

instructions for translating the electronic document displayed on the touch
screen display in a first direction to display a second portion of the
electronic document,
wherein the second portion is different from the first portion, in response to
detecting the movement;

instructions for displaying an area beyond an edge of the electronic document
and displaying a third portion of the electronic document, wherein the third
portion is smaller than the first portion, in response to the edge of the
electronic document being reached while translating the electronic document in
the first direction while the object is still detected on or near the touch
screen display; and

instructions for translating the electronic document in a second direction
--------until the area beyond the edge of the electronic document is no longer
displayed ----- to display a fourth portion of the electronic document, wherein
the fourth portion is different from the first portion, in response to detecting
that the object is no longer on or near the touch screen display.

The claimed device includes very particular instructions, instructions for
translating UNTIL THE AREA BEYOND THE EDGE OF THE ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT IS NO
LONGER DISPLAYED.

All Apple did recently is point that out to the examiner. They did not change
the scope of the claim by so doing. It was always there.

I hope that is citation enough for you.

Forgive me for once again assuming people discussing a patent had read the
claims.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )