Appeal 2007-0370
Application 09/951,560
1 speed to the posted rate of speed and determine whether to issue a ticket to
2 the owner or driver of the vehicle.
3 In rejecting the claims under 35 U.S.C. §103, the Examiner relies on a
4 combination of facts found from three references of record.
5 The Examiner has found that Vaughn discloses a vehicle speed
6 control system based on GPS/map matching of posted speeds using multiple
7 satellites to determine the location and speed of a subject vehicle and a
8 database containing the speed limit of that location. The system includes
9 satellites, a satellite receiver on the vehicle, a memory storing speed limits,
10 and a controller. The receiver receives satellite signals and can determine
11 location and speed of a vehicle. In an overspeed situation, Vaughn describes
12 that the information may be sent to law enforcement agencies by cellular
13 telephone or satellite link. (Rejection, February 25, 2004, p. 3, ll. 1-11).
14 The Examiner has also found that Horvat describes a system for
15 monitoring and detecting traffic violations including a vehicle having a
16 wireless receiver for receiving speed limit data, a speedometer, an operator
17 identification input means, a memory for storing speed limit data, a
18 controller for determining whether the speed limit is being exceeded, a
19 wireless transmitter for transmitting a violation signal to a remote location.
20 Horvat also describes that a department of motor vehicles could be informed
21 of overspeed instances (Rejection, February 25, 2004, p. 2, ll. 8-17).
22 Finally, the Examiner has found that Angeloni describes a delay
23 means for allowing a period of time to elapse before determining a speeding
24 violation. (Rejection, February 25, 2004, p. 6, ll. 4-10).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013