Appeal No. 2007-0358
Application 10/873,477
Cooper describes the use of various sensors including a turbidity sensor to
assist in the dishwasher cycle selection (“no soil, lite soil, lite soil plus, normal soil
and heavy soil”). (Column 1, lines 18-21; column 2, lines 1-4 and 28-42; column
4, lines 11-14.) Cooper teaches that “[t]he turbidity sensor measures the soil
content in the water which is an indication of the amount of soil on the dishes.”
(Column 3, lines 58-59.)
As noted, DE ‘670 teaches that the spray intensity is manually controlled in
response to the degree of soiling. We therefore conclude that one of ordinary skill
in the art would have found it obvious to automate the control of the spray intensity
at a location within the dishwasher of DE ‘670 with one or more turbidity sensors,
which (according to Cooper) are known in the art to measure the degree of dish
soiling, thus arriving at a device encompassed by appealed claim 11. The
motivation to modify the dishwasher of DE ‘670 in this manner comes from the
desire of one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an automatic dishwasher that
does not require manual activation/deactivation of the spray nozzles. In re Venner,
262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 192, 195 (CCPA 1958)(“”[I]t is well settled that it is
not ‘invention’ to broadly provide a mechanical or automatic means to replace
manual activity which has accomplished the same result.”).
While Applicants argue that neither DE ‘670 nor Cooper “teach[es] or
suggest[s] any interconnected operation of the jets 7-10 of [DE ‘670] and the
14
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013