Appeal No. 2002-0662 Page 2
Application No. 09/099,963
BACKGROUND
The appellants' invention relates to a navigation system with a vehicle location
display for showing a vehicle's current location and the location of the desired route
(specification, p. 1). A copy of the claims under appeal is set forth in the appendix to
the appellants' brief.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Fast 5,497,149 March 5, 1996
Ayanoglu et al. (Ayanoglu) 5,689,252 Nov. 18, 1997
Endo et al. (Endo) 5,902,349 May 11, 1999
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 to 11, 13 to 15, 17 to 19 and 21 to 24 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Ayanoglu in view of Fast.
Claims 2, 5, 8, 12, 16 and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
unpatentable over Ayanoglu in view of Fast and Endo.
Rather than reiterate the conflicting viewpoints advanced by the examiner and
the appellants regarding the above-noted rejections, we make reference to the answer
(Paper No. 20, mailed October 12, 2001) for the examiner's complete reasoning in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007