Appeal No. 96-0322
Application 08/123,920
is dependent on the mark-to-space ratio of the input signal I.
The appellants have not addressed this point made by the examiner
and thus no error has been shown.
Nevertheless, the appellants are correct on one point. On
page 3 of the brief, the appellants admit that stage 11 of Denk
emits an output signal which is a measure for an error function
of the sensor signal 1. The appellants argue, however, that the
error function here is not of the required type, i.e., checking
whether a given mark-to-space ratio is exceeded or whether the
direct-current component of the alternating signal is outside
certain values. We agree with the appellants, at least insofar
as finding that the examiner has not made out a prima facie case.
The examiner found (answer at 4, lines 9-11) the claimed
feature at issue to be satisfied by Denk’s detecting whether the
alternating signal’s amplitude is outside given direct-current
values A and B (see figure 2). But that is misplaced. The
claims require determining whether the direct-current component
of the alternating signal is outside given values, not whether
the instantaneous signal amplitude is outside given direct-
current values. The claimed invention is directed to the direct-
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007