Appeal No. 2000-0201
Application No. 08/691,330
pressure point along with a “previously fixed” normal maximum
braking point G (column 6, lines 40 through 44).
In concluding that the claimed invention would have been
obvious, the examiner relies upon the combined teachings of
the Yoshino and Okubo references, with the Okubo document
being relied upon as suggesting what is perceived to be
lacking in the Yoshino patent, i.e., a maximum possible
braking force, as now claimed.
Like appellants, we have difficulty with the examiner’s
rejection. Whereas Yoshino allows a driver to choose and
previously fix a normal maximum braking point, the anti-lock
control system of Okubo, contrary to the Yoshino teaching,
establishes a varying maximum vehicle body deceleration
predicated upon road conditions. It follows that, as
articulated by appellants (reply brief, page 2), the proposed
modification would not be sought by one skilled in the art
since it clearly would “destroy the purpose and function” of
the Yoshino teaching, i.e., first and second set braking
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007