Appeal No. 95-5063
Application 08/058,612
triggering due to no crew actuation of
controls, but the claim does not
particularly point out how a silent
alert is activated. Since the aural
alert can only be given a set time
after a silent alert is issued, the
claim must provide indication as to
how and when a silent alert is given.
The indefiniteness rejection of claims 10 and 11 is
reversed because the claims are in complete accord with
appellants’ disclosure (specification, page 5), because there
is absolutely nothing indefinite about the claiming of an
“aural flight crew response alert” within a predetermined time
period after a “silent flight crew advisory” has been issued,
and because appellants are not required to limit the scope of
claims 10 and 11 by including details as to “how or when ‘a
silent flight crew advisory’ is generated.”
Turning to the prior art rejections, Graham discloses a
system that uses a FMC. The FMC in Graham has been modified
so that a pilot can intervene in the preprogrammed flight
management operation of the FMC. Graham refers to the
modified FMC as an intervention flight management system
(IFMS). The IFMS disclosed by Graham differs from prior
systems in that “the IFMS allows the flight management system
[FMS] to respond to preprogrammed instructions associated with
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007