Appeal No. 2000-0230
Application No. 08/761,671
-this attitude modification indirectly generates variations in the indications
of the vertical speed pointer 11, to the right of the artificial horizon, and then
consecutive variations in the indications of the altimeter, also to the right of
the pointer,
so that the observed variations of the aforementioned three parameters are
in the same sense, which is highly advantageous.
In other words, the action of the pilot generates effects that propagate
in the correct sense towards the exterior of the indicator, from the modification
of the trim, via that of the pointer to, finally, that of the altimeter.
Thus, the instant specification provides particular reasons for placing the vertical speed
pointer between the artificial horizon and the altimeter, viz., to take advantage of natural
eye movement from left to right as a trim adjustment. Using the artificial horizon affects the
vertical speed pointer which, in turn, affects the altimeter reading. The examiner’s reasons
for modifying Konicke to resemble the instant claimed subject matter are insufficient, in
view of this disclosed, critical, nature of the claimed positioning of the vertical speed
pointer.
The examiner opines that it would have been obvious to place the position of the
vertical speed pointer and indicator between the artificial horizon and altimeter “merely
depending on the flight priorities and routes of a pilot” [answer-page 5]. The examiner
further explains that the “movement of the vertical speed indicator would have merely been
tantamount to a rearrangement of parts in an obvious manner, and would not have
modified operation of the display device” [answer-page 5]. Such a rationale is
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007