Appeal No. 2002-1258
Application No. 09/148,551
We have reviewed the portions of Israni cited by the examiner but we are unable
to determine what parts of these portions the examiner is relying on for teaching each
of the claimed steps and the examiner never explains how the reference is being
applied by presenting a one-to-one correspondence between what is disclosed by Israni
and the claimed steps.
Accordingly, the examiner has not established a prima facie case of anticipation
with regard to claims 24, 30, 32 and the claims dependent thereon. Therefore, we will
not sustain the rejection of claims 20-33 under 35 U.S.C. §102 (e).
Moreover, we agree with appellant that while Israni may disclose a parcelization
method for dividing geographic data into separate parcels, there does not appear to be,
in Israni, a combining of data defining each geographic object within a spatial extent
into one database record, as required by claims 24, 30 and 32, with claims 30 and 32
requiring the cell grouped geographic objects to be stored in one database record for
each particular identification of the respective claim.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007