Appeal No. 2005-2433
Application No. 10/259,789
Given the lack of a specific definition of the terminology “directed link” in appellant’s
specification and the broad use
of that terminology in the manner set forth in appellant’s specification at, for example,
page 1, lines 25-28, page 3,
lines 16-18 and page 7, line 20 through page 9, line 4, the examiner has concluded that
a “directed link” is a road represented as a line (or edge) on a routing graph which has or
permits a direction of travel and which generally connects two intersections or nodes on
the routing graph and is usable to determine a preferred route from an origin to a
destination on the routing graph.
Applying this understanding to the navigation system and method of Fujita, the
examiner is of the opinion that each road or link between two nodes or intersections on a
routing graph therein that has two directions of travel between the connected nodes or
intersections represents two directed links, e.g., one from node/intersection A to
node/intersection B and another from node/intersection B to node/intersection A, each of
which “directed links” (AB) and (BA) is adapted to be used to determine a preferred route
from an origin to a destination on the routing graph dependent upon where the
destination is relative to the origin and also relative to the intersections A and B. For
example, Route 95N and Route 95S extending between two nodes, intersections or
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007