Appeal No. 97-0055
Application 08/430,111
with the examiner’s conclusions that Sakamoto’s “figure 5 . . . shows a graphical image and a textual
message area,” the correction controller 70 “displays the correction operations to be performed,”
“reference data [is] employed in the system of Sakamoto,” “[d]efects are detected by the system which
are not within proper guidelines and need to be corrected,” and Sakamoto displays “the type of part
depending upon the type of automobile being manufactured and the type of defect.” On the other hand,
we fail to see the relevance of such teachings in Sakamoto to the claimed method of applying a
configuration model of a product to variable parameters of abstract assembly steps for assembling the
product to thereby produce one or more assembly instructions for assembling the product based upon
the component information that was inserted into the abstract assembly steps. According to the
appellants (Brief, page 18), “[s]uch [assembly] instructions are created automatically by the computer
by resolving the abstract assembly steps based on the configuration model.” Nothing of the sort is
taught by or would have been suggested by Sakamoto. In summary, we agree with appellants (Brief,
page 18) that “claims 22-40 are both novel and nonobvious over Sakamoto.”
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007