Appeal 2007-0482
Application 10/256,683
subscribers or (2) selecting a pre-generated displayable image that conveys
presence and location of the subscribers. As detailed in the facts section
above, we have found that Hashimoto discloses displaying a map with the
current positions of a requesting holder in a first geographic area and a third
party in a second geographic area.2 We note that the claimed limitation of
dynamically displaying an image indicating the location of subscribers
encompasses Hashimoto’s teaching of displaying on a map the current
position of a third party irrespective of whether such third party is known or
unknown to the requesting terminal. We therefore find that Hashimoto
teaches the claimed limitation. As to Burfeind, we find that its disclosed
teachings are cumulative to those of Hashimoto. Therefore, we find the
combination of Burfeind with Hashimoto properly renders representative
claim 1 unpatentable. Thus, after considering the entire record before us, we
conclude that the Examiner did not err in rejecting representative claim 1 as
being unpatentable over Hashimoto and Burfeind. We also conclude for the
same reasons that the Examiner did not err in rejecting claims 2 through 40
as being unpatentable over Hashimoto in combination with various
references.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
On the record before us, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
the present invention, would have found that Hashimoto in combination with
various references renders the claimed invention unpatentable under
2 Hashimoto suggests that the disclosed system can be used by a plurality of
holders of portable terminals so they can mutually locate one another. See
page 25, lines 1 through 4.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013