Appeal No. 1997-0234
Application 08/219,540
measuring a second degree of rotation of said shaft with said encoder during said rotation in
said second direction;
storing said second degree of rotation of said shaft in said microcomputer;
calculating a hypothetical zero position for said feeler pin in between said first and second
objects with said microcomputer based on said first and second degrees of rotation of said shaft;
rotating said shaft to said hypothetical zero position.
No prior art is relied on by the Examiner.
Claims 8-11 stand finally rejected under the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. § 112 as failing to
particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention.
Rather than reiterate the arguments of Appellants and the Examiner, reference is made to the
Brief and Answer for the respective details thereof.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the subject matter on appeal, the rejection advanced by the
Examiner, and the Examiner’s rationale in support of the rejection. We have, likewise, reviewed and
taken into consideration, in reaching our decision, Appellants’ arguments set forth in the Brief along with
the Examiner’s arguments in rebuttal set forth in the Examiner’s Answer.
It is our view, after consideration of the record before us, that claims 8-11 do not particularly
point out the invention in a manner which complies with 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph.
Accordingly, we affirm.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007