Appeal No. 95-3194
Application 08/020,232
modified by any of the secondary reference teachings. Appellants
respond that the rotational sensing structures of the applied
references are markedly different from the claimed stator sensor
pack and rotor sensor pack of claim 17 [brief, pages 12-13]. The
examiner reiterates that Shirakawa, Gaser and Sakurai generally
teach means for sensing the rotational position of a rotor with
respect to a stator [answer, page 6].
It is not entirely clear what is included within the
terms “stator sensor pack” and “rotor sensor pack.” The
specification does not provide a specific definition of these
terms, but the specification does give a specific example of
these elements in the preferred embodiment of the invention.
However, details of the stator sensor pack and the rotor sensor
pack have been recited in claim 18, and the examiner has
indicated that claim 18 contains allowable subject matter. Thus,
we can conclude that the examiner has not read the preferred
embodiment into claim 17 which broadly recites a “stator sensor
pack” and a “rotor sensor pack.” Since appellants submitted
separate claims directed to details of these two sensor packs, we
agree with the examiner that the sensor packs as broadly recited
in claim 17 should be interpreted broadly. Such being the case,
we also agree with the examiner that the invention of claim 17
12
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007