Appeal No. 1999-1578
Application 08/764,508
As we have pointed out above, Appellant's claims do recite the limitation of rotating the
servomotor such as to release the elastic deformation of the machine tool. In addition, we know that
the claims require the predetermined positional deformation to be a value that is sufficient to cause the
servomotor to release the elastic deformation of the machine tool. Therefore, we find that the claims
do positively recite a limitation that a predetermined deviation must be a sufficient value so that it would
cause the servomotor to release elastic deformation of the machine tool. Furthermore, we agree with
the Appellant that the formula disclosed in column 4 of Eto does not meet Appellant's claimed
predetermined positional deviation, because Eto uses a variable not a predetermined value. Therefore,
we do not sustain the examiner's rejection of claims 1, 2 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007