Appeal No. 1998-1341
Application 08/358,792
detect a tracking signal from the vehicle being tracked. Further, the Examiner states that
Reagan teaches that triangulation is used to determine the location of the vehicle being
tracked. The Examiner relies upon Fraughton to teach a tracking system where the
position of the tracking station can be determined by GPS. The Examiner relies upon
Angeloni to teach the use of triangulation using tracking signal bearings from tracking
stations. On page 5 of the answer, the Examiner asserts “transmitting position and
bearing data from one station to a processing station would have been an obvious
technique to one of ordinary skill in the art, in order that mobile units would not have been
restricted by any wiring constraints.” Further, on page 6 of the answer, the Examiner
asserts that since Angeloni teaches that the plotter is at one of the stations, it is clear that
the plotting station would receive position and bearing data from the other stations.
Appellant asserts on page 6 of the brief that the rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. §
103 is in error as it fails to treat elements expressly recited in the claims. More
specifically, on pages 8 and 9 of the brief appellant asserts that the combination of
reference do not teach “cooperatively providing instantaneous position references.”
Appellant asserts that the claims require the mobile tracking stations communicate their
location and bearing. Appellant further asserts that Angeloni does not disclose that the
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007