Ex parte Matsuzaki

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 10, 1998

07878500 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 10, 1998)

Application for patent filed May 5, 1992. 1
-1-
THIS OPINION WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR PUBLICATION
The opinion in support of the decision being entered today
(1) was not written for publication in a law journal and
(2) is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 17
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________
Ex parte SHIN-ICHI MATSUZAKI
____________
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,5001
____________
ON BRIEF
____________
Before MARTIN, FLEMING, and LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
MARTIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision in an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134
from the examiner's rejections of claims 1-7, all of appellant's
pending claims, under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Both rejections are
reversed.
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-2-
The claimed invention is a location detecting system
for use in a moving body, which in the preferred embodiment is a
wheeled vehicle. Referring to Figure 1, a location detecting
unit 3 responsive to a gyro 1 and wheel sensors 2 calculates the
current position of the vehicle. A navigation controller 4
causes a memory drive 6 to retrieve the road map data for the
surrounding area from a road map memory 5, which may be a CD-ROM.
Display device 7 displays the surrounding road map information
together with a mark representing the current location of the
vehicle. The operator, using selection means such as a switch 13
located on the vehicle console 8, causes the system to operate in
either of two modes, a traveling mode and a simulation mode. In
the traveling mode, the sensor data are processed by location
detecting unit 3 for generating a real time display representing
the surrounding road map information including the current
location of the vehicle. In addition, the sensor data are stored
in a detachable memory unit 12 for later use in the simulation
mode. In the simulation mode, the location detection unit 3
receives the sensor data from the memory unit rather than from
the sensors. During simulation using stored sensor data, "a
change of design in the stage of development or a repair after a
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-3-
system was mounted in a vehicle can be preformed with ease"
(Specification at 3, lines 10-12).
Claim 1, the sole independent claims, reads as follows:
1. A location detecting system mounted on a vehicle,
comprising: sensor means; a main body having an operating mode
consisting of a traveling mode and a simulation mode and
including location detecting means for calculating a current
location of said vehicle on the basis of data sensed by said
sensor means and further including a navigation controller
connected to said location detecting means; change-over means for
changing over said operating mode to said traveling mode or said
simulation mode; storage means detachably connected to said main
body; write means for storing said data sensed by said sensor
means into said storage means when said storage means is
connected to said main body and also said main body is in said
traveling mode; read means for inhibiting said data sensed by
said sensor means from being supplied to said location detecting
means and instead supplying the data stored in said storage means
to said location detecting means, when said storage means is
connected to said main body and said main body is in said
simulation mode; and displaying means for displaying during said
traveling mode said current location of said vehicle calculated
by said location detecting means, wherein during said simulation
mode, said location detecting means calculates a vehicle location
based on said data supplied from said storage means, said
calculated vehicle location being displayed by means during said
simulation mode.
The references relied on by the examiner are:
Benn et al. (Benn) 4,604,711 Aug. 5, 1986
Ando 4,903,211 Feb. 20, 1990
The examiner has rejected claims 1, 2 and 5-7 for
obviousness over Benn and claims 3 and 4 for obviousness over
Benn in view of Ando. Appellant treats claims 1, 2 and 5-7 as
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-4-
standing or falling together, arguing separately only claims 1,
3, and 4.
Benn discloses an aircraft flight data system for
visually displaying flight data directly from an aircraft flight
data recorder that has been removed from an aircraft (col. 1,
lines 11-15). Benn explains that
[t]he primary purpose for recording aircraft flight
data is to provide flight data for accident analysis
but the flight data recorded on the aircraft has also
proven useful to airline management for other purposes
including aircraft maintenance and incident analysis
such as a landing approach resulting in a hard landing
or a go-around. With the advent of modern digital
flight data recorders, that are capable of storing over
a hundred different flight parameters, the usefulness
of the data to the airline operating and maintenance
personnel has expanded dramatically. The availability
of a large number of flight parameters has made
possible significant improvements in the safety as well
as the economics of flight operations by permitting
management to analyze actual flight data. However, in
order to be useful, this data must be made available to
management in a timely manner and in useful formats.
[col. 1, lines 19-35.)
Referring to Figure 1, Benn's invention is a data display system
that reformats the flight data stored in a flight data recorder
10 or an optional copy recorder 14, converts the reformatted data
into engineering units, and then displays values these values,
including altitude, heading, acceleration, and speed (col. 11,
lines 32-34), on a cathode ray tube 26 in either the graphical
format shown in Figure 3 or the cockpit instrument format shown
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-5-
in Figures 4A and 4B (col. 3, lines 30-34). The operator can
elect to display the results in real time or in fast mode and may
choose a particular part of the flight for review (col. 13,
lines 26).
The examiner, recognizing that Benn's flight data
display system is not disclosed as being mounted on the aircraft
and thus fails to satisfy claim 1's requirement that the location
detecting system be mounted on the vehicle, argues that
one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it an
obvious matter of engineering choice to playback [sic,
play back] the recorded data wherever it was desired to
locate play back equipment, the location chosen having
no effect whatsoever on the ability of an operator to
examine the recorded data. An ordinarily skilled
artisan would have found it desirable to play back data
on the aircraft due to quicker down time of the
aircraft, by not having to transport and return
recording means between the aircraft and another
location. The decision on where to place play back
equipment would have been based on such routine design
choices as space availability, size of equipment,
availability of portable playback means, acceptable
time limits for data examination, aircraft down time
limits and type of recording medium. [Answer at 6.]
Appellant responds that the mounting of Benn's flight
data display system in the aircraft is based on hindsight and is
contrary to the stated purposes of Benn's invention, including
the primary purpose of allowing accident analysis and the
secondary management purposes of monitoring of aircraft
maintenance and performing incident analysis. The examiner
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
Answer at 6.2
Id. at 7.3
-6-
agrees that mounting Benn's flight data display system in an
aircraft is contrary to the primary purpose of accident analysis,
because a crash of the aircraft would destroy Benn's system. 2
However, he maintains this modification of the aircraft is not
contrary to the secondary management purposes, which he maintains
could be performed "at any location deemed desirable by an
ordinarily skilled artisan." Bearing in mind that a rejection3
may be based in part on the "common knowledge and common sense of
the person of ordinary skill in the art without any specific hint
or suggestion in a particular reference," In re Bozek, 416 F.2d
1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969), we are of the opinion
that the artisan would have been motivated to mount Benn's flight
data system on an aircraft in order to permit maintenance
personnel to perform an on-board display (e.g., in the fast mode)
and review of various parameters that relate to aircraft
performance, such as engine pressure ratios, inlet turbine
speeds, exhaust gas temperature, and turbine RPMs (col. 13, lines
59-64). However, we agree with appellant that an aircraft
modified to include Benn's data display system will not have a
location detection means that is responsive to the sensor output
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-7-
data during operation in the traveling mode (i.e., in flight) and
to the stored data in the storage means during operation in the
simulation (i.e., maintenance review) mode, as required by
claim 1. That the sensor output data and the stored data must be
alternatively applied to the location detecting means is clear
from claim 1's recitation of "means for inhibiting said data
sensed by the sensor means from being applied to said location
detecting means and instead supplying the data stored in said
storage means to said location detecting means, when . . . said
main body is in said simulation mode" (emphasis added). In an
aircraft modified to include Benn's data display system will
include two different location detecting means, driving two
different display means. The first location detecting means is
part of the aircraft's own navigation system (not shown), which
will continue to respond directly to the data from the sensor
means in order to control the cockpit instruments during the
traveling mode (i.e., in flight). The second location detecting
means is part of the circuitry in Benn's flight data display
system, which will be responsive to the data stored in the flight
data recorder (or the copy recorder) to control the cathode ray
tube display during the simulation mode (i.e., during on-board,
post-flight review).
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-8-
While we are reversing the rejection of claim 1 for the
foregoing reasons, we note that the examiner properly rejected
appellant's argument that an aircraft modified to include Benn's
flight data display system would not "have the capability of
being able to promptly detect the cause of a breakdown in the
navigation system, as can be carried out by the present
invention" (Brief at 8). As the examiner correctly notes, this
argument is unpersuasive because this function is not recited
the claim. See In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348, 213 USPQ 1, 5
(CCPA 1982) (argument that a feature of the invention provides a
function or result not taught by the prior art is immaterial if
the function or result is not recited in claim).
For the foregoing reasons, the rejection of claim 1 and
of claims 2 and 5-7, which stand or fall therewith, is reversed.
Dependent claims 3 and 4, which were argued separately,
stand rejected for obviousness over Benn in view of Ando.
Claim 3 specifies that the sensor means of claim 1 comprises a
magnetic sensor and wheel sensors. Claim 4 specifies that the
sensor means of claim 1 comprises a GPS (Global Positioning
Satellite) receiver for sensing an absolute location of the
vehicle.
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-9-
Ando discloses an on-board navigation system for motor
vehicles. The system controller 4, which is responsive to
signals from a compass direction sensor 1, a distance sensor 2,
and a GPS sensor 3, retrieves the surrounding road map
information from memory device 10 and causes that information and
the current vehicle location to be displayed by display unit 12
(col. 2, line 56 to col. 3, line 12). Ando does not disclose
means for recording the sensor data. The examiner's position
appears to be that it would have been obvious in view of Benn to
add a sensor data recording and playback means to Ando's land
vehicle:
It would have been obvious to utilize vehicle
location sensors as suggested by Ando in a vehicle
stored data playback device, in order that accurate
vehicle location could have been displayed using a
system as disclosed by the teachings of Benn, the
specific sensors used by Ando merely being a routine
matter of design choice based on what specific type of
vehicle the playback device was to be used in. It is
noted that land vehicle[s] would have benefitted [sic]
from playback means for the same reasons as a flight
vehicle, namely, to study the accuracy of previously
recorded data. [Final Office action at 4.]
Appellant responded to this argument by correctly noting that
Benn does not suggest using his system to study the accuracy of
recorded data; instead, his system simply converts recorded data
into engineering values for display in a graphical format or a
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
Brief at 9.4
Answer at 7.5
Reply Brief at 4-5.6
-10-
cockpit instrument format. Appellant also argued that "while4
motor vehicles are subject to maintenance, they are not subject
to rigorous maintenance procedures in airline aircraft and the
idea of using a recorder corresponding to a flight recorder on a
motor vehicle for purposes of maintenance is clearly outside of
any routine consideration by [a] person with ordinary skill in
the art." In response to this argument, the examiner explained
(for the first time) that "the use of recording means is well
established in the art, for example, [in] monitoring of stops and
engine operation in fleet trucking operations to ensure proper
delivery and equipment operation." Appellant complains, and we5 6
agree, that the examiner should have cited a reference in support
of this factual allegation. Compare In re Ahlert, 424 F.2d 1088,
1091, 165 USPQ 418, 420 (CCPA 1970) (an examiner may "take notice
of facts beyond the record which, while not generally notorious,
are capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration as
to defy dispute"). Furthermore, we agree with appellant that one
skilled in the art would not have been motivated by Benn and Ando
to add a sensor data recording and playback device to Ando's land
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-11-
vehicle. Accordingly, we are reversing the rejection of claims 3
and 4 for obviousness based on Benn and Ando.
In summary, the rejection of claims 1, 2 and 5-7 for
obviousness over Benn is reversed, as is the rejection of claims
3 and 4 for obviousness over Benn in view of Ando.
REVERSED
JOHN C. MARTIN )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
MICHAEL R. FLEMING ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
JAMESON LEE )
Administrative Patent Judge )
Appeal No. 95-1866
Application 07/878,500
-12-
LANE, AITKEN & McCANN
Watergate Office Building, Suite 600
2600 Virginia Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037