Appeal No. 2006-0165
Application 10/292,721
The appellant argues that Suarez does not disclose
processing metering data into metering information or
transmitting metering information to a driver interface module
(brief, page 12).
We take official notice that it was notoriously well known
in the art to process taxicab metering data into metering
information such as the cost of the trip and to display that
information. For example, Tamam discloses displaying fare
information for verification by passengers (col. 4, lines 33-34).
Suarez’s disclosure of displaying the assignment message to the
driver on a display screen (col. 4, lines 53-56; col. 4,
line 64 - col. 5, line 4) would have fairly suggested, to one of
ordinary skill in the art, displaying the metering information on
the same display screen to provide the driver with that
information without the expense or space requirement of a
separate screen.
The appellant argues that Suarez does not store request data
in a web server that is remote from the vehicle (brief, pages 12-
13).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007