Appeal No. 97-2476 Page 3
Application No. 07/696,079
The references relied on by the patent examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims follow:
Artz 5,025,382 Jun. 18,
1991
(filed Dec. 12, 1989)
John A. Scardina et al. (Scardina) “Future ATC Automation Aids
Based upon AI Technology,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Nov. 11,
1989, pp. 1625-33.
Tekla S. Perry, “Improving the World’s Largest, Most Advanced
System,” IEEE Spectrum, Feb. 1991, pp. 22-36.
Claims 7 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
obvious over Artz or Perry in view of Scardina. Rather than
repeat the arguments of the appellant or examiner in toto, we
refer to the appeal brief and the examiner’s answer for the
respective details thereof.
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we considered
the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced by the
examiner, and the evidence supporting the rejection. We also
considered the appellant’s arguments along with the examiner’s
arguments in rebuttal. After considering the record before
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007