Appeal No. 1998-2375
Application 08/512,065
assertion that the teachings of Figure 6 would therefore indicate only that a distance
determination is made.
What is significant is that the discussion on Figure 6 continues at lines 43 through
48 indicating in an “alternative” manner that this accelerometer ACL of Figure 6 may be
doubly integrated to produce an output having a magnitude proportional to the distance
travelled. The artisan would well understand that a single integration of an acceleration
value would yield velocity as explained earlier at lines 32 through 42 of column 6.
Mathematically speaking, the artisan would also understand that the second integration of
that value would yield a distance value. The output of this circuit according to the second
integration teaching would be a distance travelled which is utilized in accordance with the
threshold detector discussed at lines 45 through 48 which would produce a determination
of distance travelled exceeding a predetermined amount.
For appellants' assertion to be true regarding Figure 6, the output of the velocity
determination utilizing a single integration of the accelerometer ACL in Figure 6 would
require some form of time determination to be taught or shown in Figure 4. Because the
rate or velocity must be multiplied by time in accordance with the formula d=rt to equal a
distance value, it is again clear to us that McShane's initial discussion with respect to
Figure 6 would indicate that a velocity value would be utilized as the means to determine
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007