Appeal No. 2003-0622 Page 2
Application No. 09/974,545
BACKGROUND
The appellant's invention relates to a system for preventing hijacking of an
aircraft. An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of exemplary
claim 1, which is reproduced below.
The prior art references of record relied upon by the examiner in rejecting the
appealed claims are:
Borthayre et al. (French Patent)1 (Borthayre ‘798) 2,107,798 May 12, 1972
Borthayre (French Patent)1 (Borthayre ‘842) 2,584,842 Jan. 16, 1987
Flight Test Evaluation of the Stanford University/United Airlines Differential GPS
Category III Automatic Landing System, Kaufmann et al., NASA TM-110354, June
1995, page 474 (Auto 737).
RQ-1 Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, U.S. Air Force Fact Sheet, August 2000
http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/RQ_1_Predator_Unmanned_Aerial.html 9 (RQ -1).
How to stop commercial air hijackings without inconveniencing air travelers, Kirsch,
Sep. 20, 2001, http://www.skirsch.com/politics/plane/disable.htm (Kirsch).
Claims 1-4, 7, 13, 17-22, 28, 32-36, 39, 41, 44, 50 and 55 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Borthayre ‘842.
Claims 1-4, 7, 13, 17-22, 28, 32-36, 39, 41, 44, 50 and 55 also stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Borthayre ‘842 in view of Auto
737.
1Our understanding of these foreign language documents was obtained from PTO translations,
copies of which are enclosed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007