Appeal No. 1999-0365
Application 08/601,724
as applying a range of resistance loads to simulate dynamic
driving conditions. The examiner finds that it would have
been obvious to the artisan to vary the resistance loads of
Weeder by applying a range of such loads as taught by Sano
[answer, pages 6-7].
With respect to independent claims 19 and 49,
appellant argues that the claimed application of a plurality
of resistance loads to the output element of the transmission
being tested is not taught or suggested by any of the art of
record. Specifically, appellant argues that dynamic driving
conditions at the output element of the transmission cannot be
simulated as claimed by the applied prior art [brief, pages
15-19].
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007