Appeal No. 1998-1231 Page 11
Application No. 08/729,835
from affecting the velocity of the driven component” is
functional in nature. However, specific structure is claimed
for carrying out the function of preventing motor torque
disturbances from affecting the velocity of the driven
component. This claim limitation simply cannot be ignored.
The examiner further asserts (answer, pages 6-7)
It can be seen that torque disturbances are present
in the instant invention. It however, cannot be seen
where the generated “motor control signal prevents
motor torque disturbances from effecting [sic] the
velocity of the driven component”. . . . It cannot be
found where the “control signal prevents motor torque
disturbances”. No torque measurements are seen
within
the specification description nor any means to prevent
them.
The point raised by the examiner appears to be more directed
to issues of enablement and/or indefiniteness than
anticipation. However, in order to clarify the record, we
shall address this issue raised by the examiner. We direct
the examiner’s attention to the specification (pages 10 and
11) which recite that
there is a problem with the periodic higher
frequency of the motor torque disturbance and its
harmonics. This is true because even though the
circumference of a roll turning at 3 hertz, for
example, may be only a few degrees out of phase for
rotation with respect to the image pitch, resulting
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007