Appeal No. 2000-0431 Page 20
Application No. 08/789,127
from the distance sensors 28, 30 and the encoders 24, 26, the
robot 10 determines the dimensions of the area 40.” Col. 3,
ll. 13-15. “Once the plan of the area 40 is determined, the
robot 10 determines a path to completely traverse the area 40.
For example, a zigzag path 52 such as shown in FIG. 3 may be
calculated by the microprocessor 34 taking into account
the dimensions of the area 40 and the cleaning width 54 of the
robot 10.” Id. at ll. 16-21. We find that calculating the zig
zag path 52 necessarily involves determining a distance between a
forward path and a backward path in the zig zag path based on the
parameters of a region and a stopping point. Therefore, we
affirm the rejection of claim 11 and of claim 12, which falls
therewith.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the rejection of claims 1-7 and 13-21 under
§ 103(a) is reversed, but the rejection of claims 11 and 12 is
affirmed. Our affirmance is based only on the arguments made in
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007