Appeal No. 2005-2038
Application No. 09/957,416
noted by the examiner at the bottom of page 5 of the answer, “Deker
supplements the teaching of Meyers by varying the altitude as a function of
three-dimensional representations of hazards.” From the point of view of
an artisan, the teachings of Deker obviously would have embellished upon
the teachings of Meyers.
The discussion relative to Figures 3 through 6 of Myers relate to two-
dimensional as well as three-dimensional travel path constructs such that
the showing in Figure 6 strongly suggests the polygonal features of
dependent claims 2 and 3, which have corresponding teachings in Deker as
to the cylindrical volume 10 depicted in Figures 2 and 3 of that reference.
The showings in all these figures, as well as the corresponding discussion
of them, suggests multiple polygons to the extent recited in dependent
claim 3. Even though the alternate embodiment in Figure 8 of Meyers’
illustration simplifies the computational example by constraining or
minimizing the third or altitude computations with respect to its brief
discussion beginning at the bottom of column 13, Figure 8 does show
multiple thunderstorms TS1 and ST2 as hazards. Obviously, within
35 U.S.C. § 103, according to the earlier discussions in Meyers, these
-7-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007