Ex Parte Baeuerle - Page 2



           Appeal No. 2006-1094                                                                      
           Application No. 09/976,788                                                                


                                          BACKGROUND                                                 
                 The appellant's invention relates to a method and control device for                
           operating a torque-converter lockup clutch.  In accordance with appellant’s               
           invention, the slip of the torque converter is adjusted to a setpoint value while the     
           lockup clutch is being closed, the set point value being continuously selected inside     
           a closing interval as a function of time and taking into account the input torque         
           being applied to the torque converter.  A copy of the claims under appeal is set          
           forth in the appendix to the appellant's brief.                                           
                 The examiner relies upon the following as evidence of unpatentability:              
           Cowan    5,029,087   Jul. 2, 1991                                                         

                 Claims 1-30 all stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated        
           by Cowan.                                                                                 
                 Rather than reiterate in their entirety the conflicting viewpoints advanced by      
           the examiner and the appellant regarding this appeal, we make reference to the            
           examiner's answer (mailed June 15, 2005) for the examiner's complete reasoning in         
           support of the rejection and to the appellant's brief (filed March 24, 2005) and          
           reply brief (filed August 18, 2005) for the appellant's arguments thereagainst.           

                                                OPINION                                              
                 In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration        
           to the appellant's specification and claims, to the applied Cowan patent, and to the      
           respective positions articulated by the appellant and the examiner.  After full           
                                                 2                                                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007