Appeal 2007-1087
Application 11/150,806
Claims 9, 17, and 18 stand rejected as being unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Gagnon and Bezooijen.
Rather than repeat the arguments here, we make reference to the
Briefs and the Answer for the respective positions of Appellant and the
Examiner.
We reverse.
ISSUE
Appellant contends that Gagnon’s method of determining the
orientation of a telescope requires the user to know and submit the
coordinates of each of two known stars (Br. 5) which is different from
Bezooijen’s capturing an image of a group of stars and comparing the
angular separation as well as intensity of the stars appearing in that single
image (Br. 8-9). The Examiner argues that Bezooijen does not require a user
to input the coordinates of the celestial objects and instead allows using the
unique pattern of the objects to be used for matching the angular separation
between the objects (Answer 10). Therefore, the issue on appeal turns on
whether a preponderance of the evidence before us shows that the
combination of the prior art teaches or suggests the claimed subject matter
and specifically detecting first and second measured angles between three
celestial objects to be used in determining the orientation of the telescope.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Gagnon relates to a system for determining the orientation of a
telescope (col. 2, ll. 24-26) wherein the coordinates of two known points or
stars are inputted for calculating the zenith coordinates, which is used for
aligning the telescope to other desired coordinates (col. 2, ll. 31-42).
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013