Appeal No. 2005-2712
Application No. 10/408,302
the respective resolution of regions within the area based at least partially upon the
aircraft platform. Again, note column 21, lines 30-54 and the reference therein to
“certain two engine aircraft,” as well as to the need to view critical terrain areas that
impose additional safety concerns for such aircraft and also require further processing
element evaluation of data from a digital terrain data base to arrive at an eligible
alternative route and a set of critical terrain points to the alternate in decreasing order of
altitude, if one engine of the plane should fail. Accordingly, the examiner’s rejection of
claims 33 and 37 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Tang will also be
sustained.
In addition, Tang discloses that the input receives data regarding different types of
points (e.g., fix points, restricted areas, critical terrain areas, etc.) along the mission
route, and then uses the processing element to determine the area and resolution of
regions within the area based at least partially upon the different types of points along
the mission route, particularly the critical terrain points mentioned at column 21, lines
30-54). Thus, the examiner’s rejection of claims 34 and 38 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as
being anticipated by Tang will be sustained.
As for the rejection of dependent claims 35 and 39, we note that the system and
method of Tang includes a processing element that is capable of determining, and does
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007