Appeal No. 1998-1734
Application No. 07/508,024
Independent apparatus claims 41 and 43 are in means-plus-
function format and it is clear from the disclosure that these
“means” refer to the software embodiment disclosed. The computer
program provides for the claimed functions and, like the method
claims, claims 41 and 43 are directed to a practical application
of any mathematical algorithms recited. That is, the claims are
directed to the planning of a path for an object to follow in a
physical task space and for updating a configuration space based
on changed conditions so that updated signals can be used by the
object to follow the path. While it is true that the claims do
not actually require use of the resultant parameter signals by
the object since they stop short at the production of those
signals and recite only an intended use, i.e., the parameter
signals “being usable” by the object, the updated parameter
signals produced are, themselves, of practical utility, in
controlling the movement of an object in a path.
Turning to independent claim 46, this claim is directed to a
“computer readable storage medium encoded with a computer program
. . . . ” On its face, the claim is directed to statutory
subject matter, i.e., a “computer readable storage medium” is, at
least, an article of manufacture. The fact that it comprises
thereon an encoded computer program does not now take this
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007