Appeal No. 2001-1480 Page 9
Application No. 09/129,285
Claims 1 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
being unpatentable over Ayanoglu in view of Marcy.
Our discussion supra of Ayanoglu and Marcy is
incorporated herein. As noted above, Ayanoglu discloses the
method of claim 1 with the exception of the step of
transmitting traffic control signals to traffic control
devices. However, Marcy’s teaching of regulating traffic
lights using traffic patterns analyzed on the basis of traffic
information obtained by automated traffic monitoring devices
would have provided ample suggestion to one skilled in the art
to use the traffic information stored in the central database
50 of Ayanoglu to regulate traffic control devices such as
traffic lights to alleviate road encumbrances.
As for claim 5, Ayanoglu discloses transmission of
signals and traffic information via a wireless radio link
(column 3, line 43). In light of this teaching, it would have
been obvious to transmit control signals to the traffic
control devices, such as traffic lights, over a wireless radio
link. With regard to claims 6 and 7, Ayanoglu teaches
transmitting real time information about traffic patterns to
individual vehicles to enable course determination (see column
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007