Appeal No. 96-1106
Application 07/998,721
in the application.2
The invention relates to a traffic navigation apparatus
and method. Copies of claims 14, 17 through 20, 23 and 24
appear in the appendix to the appellants' main brief (Paper
No. 15).3
The references relied upon by the examiner as evidence of
obviousness are:
Link 5,184,303 Feb. 2, 1993
(filed Feb. 28, 1991)
Kirson 5,220,507 Jun. 15, 1993
(effectively filed Nov. 8, 1990)
Claims 14, 17 through 20, 23 and 24 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Link in view of
Kirson.
Reference is made to the appellants' main brief (Paper
No. 15) and to the examiner's answer (Paper No. 16) for the
respective positions of the appellants and the examiner with
2Claim 23 has been amended subsequent to final rejection.
3As pointed out by the examiner on page 2 in the answer
(Paper No. 16), the copy of claim 23 appended to the main
brief does not include the amendments made subsequent to final
rejection (see note 2 supra).
-2-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007