Appeal No. 1998-0872
Application No. 08/438,479 Page 21
teaches (page 3) that icons for cameras are shown on the
graphical image (map) denoting their actual positions in the real
world, and that cameras have pan and tilt capability. We agree
with the examiner (answer, pages 17 and 18) and find that in view
of Smart's disclosure of displaying icons on the graphical image
to denote their "actual position" in the real world, that even
though the pan and tilt of the camera are controlled by the
surveillance and assessment portion of the workstation, that it
would have been obvious to show the pan or tilt of the camera on
the graphical display in order for the operator to know the
direction and angle that the camera is pointing. Accordingly,
the rejection of independent claim 109, and claim 110 which
depends therefrom, is affirmed.
We turn next to the rejection of claims 111-113 (Group VII)
under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The examiner's position (answer, page 18)
is that an operator can select any target of interest for
viewing, and that because Smart discloses automatic panning and
tilting to an alarm location and display of the alarm location,
that it would have been obvious to provide automatic panning and
tilting of a camera to a target selected by the operator.
Appellant asserts (brief, page 18) that the examiner's
position is unsupported and that neither Smart nor Williams shows
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007