Appeal No. 96-2583
Application 08/243,087
point. Moroto uses an input unit 5 for inputting the departure point and the destination point into the
navigation processor 7. The display 31 displays a route from the departure point to the destination
point. The navigation apparatus stores road data in a memory map 21, and the navigation processor
determines the route from the departure point to the destination point based upon the map data. The
navigation processor calculates a present position on the route to the destination point, and then
calculates the distance from the present position to the destination point. The route from the present
position to the destination point is then displayed by display 31.
The examiner acknowledges that Moroto does not calculate a degree of attainment according
to the claimed equation, but concludes that “a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention would have recognized that the Moroto et al. display can be obtained by the simple ratio of
part to whole” (Answer, pages 3 and 4). “Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention would have found it obvious to apply the claimed equation to arrive at the degree of
attainment in Moroto et al. because the display and its calculation are simplified thereby making it easier
for the driver to ascertain the course while driving” (Answer, page 4).
Appellants argue (Brief, pages 8 and 9) that:
Moroto et al is silent regarding a Degree of Attainment which considers the trip traveled
(i.e., from the start position to the present position) relative to the whole trip (i.e., from
the start position to the destination position), as is specifically defined in claim 7. The
Degree of Attainment shown in Fig. 13 of Moroto is merely an indication of how far the
vehicle has to travel until the . . . destination. Accordingly, there is simply no teaching in
Moroto et al which would suggest the specific Degree of Attainment recited in claim 7.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007