Ex Parte Morita et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Mar 12, 2012

10486787 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 12, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
10/486,787 02/13/2004 Hiroyuki Morita 50070-094 4795
7590 03/12/2012
McDermott Will & Emery
600 13th Street NW
Washington, DC 20005-3096
EXAMINER
MANCHO, RONNIE M
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3664
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/12/2012 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte HIROYUKI MORITA, SHINICHI KAWADA, and
EIICHI MUROHASHI
____________

Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787
Technology Center 3600
____________

Before JENNIFER D. BAHR, LINDA E. HORNER, and
STEFAN STAICOVICI, Administrative Patent Judges.

HORNER, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Hiroyuki Morita et al. (Appellants) seek our review under 35 U.S.C.
§ 134 of the Examiner’s decision rejecting claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Streit (US 5,774,824; iss. Jun. 30, 1998) and Lin
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

2
(US 6,622,090 B2; iss. Sep. 16, 2003) and claims 3 and 4 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(e) as anticipated by Lin. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM-IN-PART.
THE INVENTION
Appellants’ claimed invention “relates to a navigation device and a
navigation method to be used for guiding a moving body such as a human
being or a vehicle.” Spec. 1. Claims 2 and 3, reproduced below, are
representative of the subject matter on appeal.
2. A navigation device comprising:
means for determining the current position of a user
using an absolute position expressed as angular data in units of
degrees longitude and degrees latitude by using the electric
waves coming from a plurality of artificial satellites going
around the earth;
means for storing coordinates of longitude and latitude of
a starting place and a final place, and coordinates of longitude
and latitude of nodes, as obtained by setting said starting point
and said final place, on a scheduled route, wherein the
coordinates are stored as angular data in units of degrees
longitude and degrees latitude;
means for displaying said current position and said
scheduled route;
means for controlling the display of said means for
displaying, by converting the angular data of said absolute
positions and said coordinates into distance data while making
corrections according to said current position, by calculating an
element between said nodes to determine whether or not said
current position is on said scheduled route, based on whether or
not the distance between said element and said current position
is within a predetermined range, and by changing a display on
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

3
said means for displaying based on the calculation of whether
or not the distance between said element and said current
position is within said predetermined range; and
means for receiving the coordinates of longitude and
latitude of said starting place and said final place, and
coordinates of longitude and latitude of said nodes, from an
external auxiliary device for determining said scheduled route
based on the starting place and final place.
3. A navigation method comprising:
setting a starting place and a final place;
providing the starting place and final place to an external
auxiliary device;
determining at least one scheduled route based on the
provided starting place and final place using the external
auxiliary device;
receiving coordinates in longitude and latitude of the
starting place and the final place, and coordinates in longitude
and latitude of nodes on said scheduled route, as angular data in
units of degrees longitude and degrees latitude through interface
means from said external auxiliary device;
storing coordinates in longitude and latitude of the
starting place and the final place, and coordinates in longitude
and latitude of nodes on said scheduled route, the navigation
device as angular data in units of degrees longitude and degrees
latitude;
detecting an absolute position in longitude and latitude of
the current position of a user by using electric waves coming
from a plurality of artificial satellites going around the earth,
the absolute position being expressed as angular data in units of
degrees longitude and degrees latitude;
correcting the angular data of said absolute position and
said coordinates according to said current position and
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

4
converting the corrected angular data into distance data, and
calculating an element between said nodes;
calculating whether or not said current position is on said
scheduled route based on whether or not the distance between
said element and said current position is within a predetermined
range;
displaying said current position and said scheduled route
in accordance with the calculation results; and
controlling a display based on the calculation of whether
or not the distance between said element and said current
position is within said predetermined range.
ISSUES
The issues presented by this appeal are:
Does Lin disclose “determining at least one scheduled route based on
the provided starting place and final place using the external auxiliary
device” and “receiving coordinates . . . from said external auxiliary device”
as called for in claim 3?
Would the combined teachings of Streit and Lin have led one of
ordinary skill in the art to the claimed “means for receiving the coordinates
. . . from an external auxiliary device for determining said scheduled route
based on the starting place and final place” as called for in claim 2?
ANALYSIS
Rejection of claims 3 and 4 as anticipated by Lin
The Examiner’s finding of anticipation is based on the determination
that Lin’s operational interface 10 and functional menu 20 are collectively
an “external auxiliary device.” Ans. 6, 8 (interpreting the “external auxiliary
device” as “a common computer known in the art” and noting that “the
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

5
terms ‘external auxiliary’ are not particularly explained [in] applicant’s
disclosure.”).1
Appellants’ Specification describes that the external auxiliary device
20 includes processing means 22 made of a personal computer or PDA for
searching the scheduled route, reproduction means 24 such as a CD-ROM
drive unit for reproducing a storage medium 23 such as a CD-ROM. Spec.
9, l. 21 – 10, l. 1. “[E]xternal auxiliary device 20 is connected with the
navigation device 10 by connecting its interface means 21 and the interface
means 13 of the navigation device 10.” Spec. 9, ll. 19-21. The navigation
device 10 includes a GPS receiver 11, a display 12, an interface 13 for
“exchanging data with the outside through a wired transmission (e.g., LAN)
or a wireless transmission (e.g., IrDA),” a memory 14, a switch 15, and a
microcomputer 16. Spec. 8, l. 25 – 9, l. 13. Figure 1 shows all the
components of navigation device 10 encompassed by a dashed line box and
all the components of the external auxiliary device encompassed by a
separate dashed line box. We understand from this description that the
external auxiliary device 20 is “external” to the navigation device 10, which
houses the GPS receiver, display, and microcomputer, in that the interface
21 of the auxiliary device 20 is connected to interface 13 of the navigation
device 10 via either a wired connection or a wireless transmission.

1 The Examiner originally identified Lin’s geospatial database 38 as the
external auxiliary device. Final Office Action at 5, dated Oct. 6, 2008. In
the Answer, however, the Examiner found that operational interface 10 and
functional menu 20 are the external auxiliary device. Ans. 6, 8.
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

6
Lin discloses a system having an operational interface 10, a friendly
integrated functional menu 20, an IMU/GPS integrated system 30, a
database query and access module 31, a mission specific database creation
module 32, a data downloading module 33, a data uploading module 34, a
database updating module 35, a feature attribute coding catalogue 36, a
position sensor 50, a communication interface 37, and a geospatial
database 38. Col. 5, ll. 8-18; fig. 1.
The operational interface 10 provides the user with the
entry of commands. The operational interface 10 includes a
touch screen with which the user can use his finger or a stylus
to operate the embedded software, for example to perform
database query. The operational interface 10 can also be
enhanced by a soft keyboard with which the user can input
commands exactly like the keyboard of a desktop computer.
The operational interface 10 can also be a handwriting
recognition system. The user can just write the commands on
the screen to input commands. The friendly integrated
functional menu 20 provides the user with involved navigation
and database query functions, including map viewer, trip
scheduler, IMU/GPS navigator, street locator, snap router, and
information query.
Col. 5, ll. 19-45.
We agree with Appellants that “[t]he geospatial database 38 is the
only part of Lin’s system taught to be external.” Reply Br. 4. In the
embodiment of Figure 1, the geospatial database 38 is a remote database,
which is not stored in the navigation process platform. Col. 5, ll. 5-8; fig. 1.
The remaining components of Lin’s system are stored in the navigation
process platform. Fig. 1. For example, the touch screen or soft keyboard of
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

7
operational interface 10 operates embedded software. Col. 5, ll. 20-26.
Operational interface 10 and functional menu 20 are not “external” to the
navigation process platform. Thus, we disagree with the Examiner’s finding
that Lin’s operational interface 10 and functional menu 20 are the claimed
“external auxiliary device.” Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of
independent method claim 3 or dependent claim 4 as anticipated by Lin.
Rejection of claim 2 as unpatentable over Streit and Lin
The Examiner’s rejection of claim 2 is based on the finding that
Streit’s central control facility 24 is the claimed “external auxiliary device.”
Ans. 4, 10 (citing Streit, col. 7, ll. 46-52 and l. 66 – col. 8, l. 6). Appellants
argue that Streit’s “vague disclosure” that the central control facility 24
monitors vehicles 4 and sends them “route information” is an inadequate
basis on which to find that this central control facility 24 determines a route,
as claimed. App. Br. 10. Appellants also argue that, in the situation when a
navigating vehicle deviates from a route or needs to detour, Streit teaches
that “a dispatcher (i.e., a person) can send a new route to the vehicle, not an
‘external auxiliary device,’ as claimed” and that “[o]ne skilled in the art
would realize a human dispatcher is not the same thing as the claimed
auxiliary device.” Reply Br. 7.
Claim 2 calls for “means for receiving the coordinates of longitude
and latitude of said starting place and said final place, and coordinates of
longitude and latitude of said nodes, from an external auxiliary device for
determining said scheduled route based on the starting place and final
place.” The claim does not require that the external auxiliary device
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

8
determine the scheduled route. Rather, the claim requires the means for
receiving to receive the coordinates “from an external auxiliary device.”
The claimed navigation device then uses these coordinates “to determine
said scheduled route.” This understanding of claim 2 is consistent with the
Specification, which describes that the external auxiliary device sends point
data of the starting place and finish point and node data of intersections or
points on a route to the navigation device 10, which stores the data in RAM,
and uses the data to calculate an on-route state and an off-route state. Spec.
11, ll. 4-14 and 15, ll. 17-19.
Streit discloses that transceiver 22 can receive route information from
central control facility 24:
As depicted in FIG. 3, the map matching navigation
system may further include a first transceiver 22 for
transmitting vehicle position information to a central control
facility 24 or a similar vehicle monitoring facility, and receiving
route information or other communications from the central
control facility 24 or other remote positions. The central
control facility 24 may be present for monitoring a plurality of
vehicles 4 equipped with the map matching navigation system
according to the invention.
Col. 4, ll. 43-52. Streit also discloses that a dispatcher at central control
facility 24 can download an updated route to transceiver 22:
The central control facility 24 may continuously track the
location of the vehicle 4 as previously described. A dispatcher
at the central control facility 24, if aware of the detour point 61,
could download an altered predetermined map route 8a around
the detour point 61 to the vehicle 4 via the first transceiver 22
and a second transceiver 23. The map matching navigation
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

9
system would then track the vehicle 4 on the altered
predetermined map route 8 without querying the driver.
Col. 7, l. 66 – col. 8, l. 7. As stated supra, Streit discloses that a dispatcher
can send a new route to a vehicle that needs to detour. Streit discloses that
the dispatcher is “at the central control facility 24” and that the dispatcher
can “download” the alternate route. Id. One of ordinary skill in the art
would understand Streit to describe that a person located at a central control
facility 24 would send the updated route electronically from a device within
the central control facility 24 that has the capability to communicate with the
transceiver 22. The means for receiving in Streit (transceiver 22) would
receive the coordinates of this updated route “from an external auxiliary
device”, i.e., a device at the central control facility 24 that the dispatcher
uses to download the new route, as in claim 2. Thus, we are not persuaded
by Appellants’ arguments and we sustain the rejection of claim 2 over Streit
and Lin.2
CONCLUSIONS
Lin does not disclose “determining at least one scheduled route based
on the provided starting place and final place using the external auxiliary
device” and “receiving coordinates . . . from said external auxiliary device”
as called for in claim 3.
The combined teachings of Streit and Lin would have led one of
ordinary skill in the art to the claimed “means for receiving the coordinates

2 Appellants argue that Lin does not disclose the claimed external auxiliary
device. This is not sufficient to reverse the rejection of claim 2 because the
Examiner relied on Streit to disclose this device. Ans. 4.
Appeal 2010-001124
Application 10/486,787

10
. . . from an external auxiliary device for determining said scheduled route
based on the starting place and final place” as called for in claim 2.
DECISION
We AFFIRM the decision of the Examiner to reject claim 2 and we
REVERSE the decision of the Examiner to reject claims 3 and 4.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

nlk