Appeal No. 1997-1577 Page 6
Application No. 07/941,466
788 (Fed. Cir. 1984); and In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 1052,
189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976).
The appellants state (brief, page 1) that “[c]laims 1-16
are grouped together.” The appellants present the same
arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 6. We
therefore select claim 1 as representative of the group.
Two issues are presented (brief, page
4) before us on appeal. The first issue is whether the
combination of Dawson, Thompson, Seki, and Rymer establish a
prima facie case of
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and particularly whether
the prior art teaches “generating a hard copy of a
navigational chart which is correlated to said non-real-world
visual
database . . . .” The second issue is whether, assuming that
the prior art establishes a prima facie case of obviousness,
the Declaration evidence of long-felt need in the art is
sufficient to overcome the prima facie case.
The appellants state (brief, page 5) that claims 1 and 6
include the steps of “reading said non-real-world visual
database into a filtered data structure” and “generating a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007