Appeal No. 1997-1762
Application No. 08/270,406
Electrical Engineering Paul M. Anderson that shows Carson’s
Equation with the same units set forth in the declaration.
The excerpt from Professor Anderson’s work, therefore,
corroborates declarant’s statement that Carson’s Equation is
correct in spite of the apparently incompatible dimensions.
It would have been helpful if declarant had explained in
the declaration that the number 2160 in Carson’s Equation has
implied units attached thereto that would cause the
cancellation of the hertz and ohm-meters units to yield units
of feet on both sides of the equation (Request, page 4).
According to appellants (Request, page 6), “units of the
numbers 0.3 and 90,000 [in equations 6-1 and 6-2] are
‘implied’, as any practitioner skilled in the art will
understand - just as with Carson’s Equation” that will cause
the cancellation of some units to yield the same units on both
sides of the equations.
Based upon the corroborative evidence, and the additional
explanation by appellants (Request, pages 3 through 6), we
agree with appellants that Carson’s Equation and the equations
6-1 and 6-2 in the application are “examples of apparently
‘dimensionally incorrect’ equations that are accepted as
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007