Appeal No. 1997-1111 Page 19
Application No. 08/105,899
the reasons which follow. In Hägglund (col. 3, lines 12-19),
the amplitude and frequency of the self oscillation are
measured “by means of a measuring unit 10 the system output
variable y. The quantity values resulting from said measuring
are used for calculating the parameters k, T and T which areI D
adjusted by means of the adjusting means 9 , 9 , and 9 of thep i d
control function units P-, I- and D, respectively.” In
addition, in Hägglund (col. 3, lines 10 and 11), the adjusting
means 9 adjusts the amplitude of the proportional control
p
unit P up to a point of self-oscillation.
We find no suggestion of how the system identification
unit of Ueda would have functioned to increase the amplitude
of a
non-linear signal inputted into the fuzzy inference unit 11 up
to a point of self-oscillation, and the examiner has not
provided any convincing line of reasoning in support of such
modification. We therefore find that it would not have been
obvious for the artisan to have combined the teachings of
Hägglund with the teachings of Ueda to arrive at the claimed
invention. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 2 under 35
U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Ueda in view of Hägglund is
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007