Appeal No. 96-0998
Application No. 08/180,288
Valentini suggests processing a proportionally varying
signal from the motion sensor to indicate when a predetermined
reference value is exceeded. Column 3, lines 53-56. Such a
predetermined value corresponds to the predetermined “impact”
level argued by appellant. Valentini shows in Figure 1 an
inductance coil 8 positioned entirely between moveable magnet 12
and fixed magnet 6. Such an arrangement fully satisfies the
limitations of Claim 1 asserted by Appellant.
In any event, the subject matter of Claim 1 was suggested by
Tognola with or without Valentini. Thus, the rejection of Claims
4, 5, and 8 will be sustained.
Claim 14 specifies connection to an air bag actuation means.
The examiner argues that an air bag is nothing more than one of
numerous uses for which an accelerometer would be used.
Examiner’s Answer at 8, lines 9-14. Appellant argues that the
references make no inference or suggestion regarding an air bag.
We agree with Appellant.
Although Valentini suggests that the output signal can be
employed in the control of actuators used on motor vehicles (e.g.
regulating the vehicle suspension as a function of the amount of
vertical acceleration detected), there is no mention of an air
bag. Column 1, lines 35-39; Column 4, lines 24-28. Having no
15
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007