Appeal No. 95-4918
Application No. 08/114,293
patentee Wolfe’s teaching of filtering only absolute motion
signals, the teaching being acknowledged by the examiner (main
answer, page 4).
The examiner refers us (main answer, page 4) to the
disclosure by Wolfe (column 3, lines 42 through 45) of a first
order low pass filter for eliminating unwanted “noise.”
Clearly, filters for noise elimination are known in this art.
However, the difficulty we have with the rejection before
us is that when we set aside what appellants have taught us in
the present application, and consider the evidence of
obviousness as a whole, we conclude that the evidence relied
upon would not have motivated one of ordinary skill in the art
to make the modification proposed by the examiner. Of
consequential importance to us is the circumstance that one of
ordinary skill
in this art would have been clearly instructed by the teaching
of Wolfe to only filter an absolute velocity signal, when both
absolute velocity and relative velocity signals are generated.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007