Appeal No. 1998-1797
Application No. 08/609,943
fails to teach or suggest that the mechanical time constant,
KM, is in any way related to the variables recited in claim 1.
Appellants choose the relationship between the spatial angle
and the mechanical time constant and the number of revolutions
of the motor in order to produce what appellants consider to
be superior, or advantageous, results regarding minimization
of a variation of Hall voltage output of each position
detector due to magnetic imbalances. Without a particular
teaching, or at least some clear suggestion of this claimed
relationship, the examiner’s finding of obviousness would
appear to be based on a hindsight reconstruction of
appellants’ invention.
The examiner has not shown anything in the applied prior
art which would indicate a desire to relate the spatial angle
to the mechanical time constant of the motor and so we fail to
see how the examiner can be considered to have established a
prima facie case of obviousness with regard to the instant
claimed subject matter.
The decision of the examiner rejecting claims 1-7 under
35 U.S.C. 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007