Appeal No. 2002-0662 Page 22
Application No. 09/099,963
Claims 12 and 20 depend from claims 11 and 19 respectively. Thus, the
decision of the examiner to reject claims 12 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed
for the reasons set forth above with respect to claims 11 and 19.2
Claim 5 adds to its parent claim the further limitation that the navigation system
determines a distance from the position to the route and that the display displays the
distance. For the reasons set forth above with respect to claims 2, 8 and 16, the
decision of the examiner to reject claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 13 to
15, 17, 21, 23 and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed and the decision of the
examiner to reject claims 2, 5, 8, 10 to 12, 16, 18 to 20 and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed.
2 In addition, the limitations of claims 12 and 20 are not taught or suggested by the applied prior
art for the reasons set forth above with respect to claims 2, 8 and 16.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007