Appeal No. 2000-0950 Page 7
Application No. 08/925,247
measured yaw rate; and (b) a closed loop term responsive to a first error between the
measured yaw rate and a predicted yaw rate, a second error between a previously
estimated derivative of lateral velocity and a predicted derivative of lateral velocity and a
third error between the measured lateral acceleration and a predicted lateral
acceleration. Specifically, Ashrafi lacks an observer containing a closed loop term
responsive to "a second error between a previously estimated derivative of lateral
velocity and a predicted derivative of lateral velocity."
In our view, the examiner's position as to how this limitation is met by Ashrafi is
in error for the reasons set forth by the appellant in the reply brief and the supplemental
reply brief, which reasons we incorporate as our own.
Since the subject matter of claim 1 is not met by Ashrafi for the reasons set forth
above, the decision of the examiner to reject claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) is
reversed.
The decision of the examiner to reject dependent claims 2 and 3 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is also reversed since the examiner has not established that the
above-noted limitation of parent claim 1 not taught by Ashrafi would have been obvious
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007