Appeal No. 1998-0872
Application No. 08/438,479 Page 15
considered obvious that such manipulation of images may certainly
be provided by Smart." Even if we considered the center screen
to be a sub-palette of a graphical image of an entire area on a
small scale as advanced by the examiner, the enlarged image on
the adjacent monitors displays the camera view, and does not
display an enlarged graphical image with first and/or second
icons, as required by claim 102. Moreover, claim 102 calls for
the simultaneous display of both graphical images on the same
monitor. The examiner has not addressed the question of the
obviousness of putting the enlarged camera display from one of
the adjacent monitors onto the graphics display (map) monitor.
In addition, if the zooming in on an area of the graphics display
were considered to be the claimed enlarged area with a graphical
image with first and/or second icons of a selected smaller
portion of the entire area, the language of claim 102 would still
not be met. Claim 102 calls for the enlarged graphical image to
be adjacent to the sub-image palette on a monitor. When zooming
in on a portion of the map, there is no disclosure in Smart for
the enlarged zoomed image to be adjacent to the sub-image palette
showing an entire graphical image on a small scale. Viewing
figure 4 of Smart, the map appears to display three incident
summaries with leader lines. Figure 5 of Smart shows three
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007