Appeal No. 2005-2272
Application 09/791,656
Lee and directed at the vehicle will also be directed at the
space in front of the vehicle as taught by Lee. Such a panoramic
camera would also be directed at the track in front of a train
and the waterway in front of a boat as claimed.
In summary, we have sustained the examiner’s rejection of
claims 1-9. Therefore, the decision of the examiner rejecting
claims 1-9 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in
connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 CFR
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED
JERRY SMITH )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge ) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
MAHSHID D. SAADAT )
Administrative Patent Judge )
JS:pgc
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007