Appeal No. 2000-1961
Application 08/840,200
Many of appellants' arguments expressly or impliedly rely on
the unclaimed limitation of an evolving baseline. For example,
appellants argue that "[i]f the baseline of any of the cited
references was changed during the on-line operations, the system
would not function" (Br4), implying that the claimed invention
somehow takes account of a changing baseline; this has not been
claimed. Appellant refers to the statement in the disclosure
(spec. at 6, lines 7-11): "The system of the present invention
also redefines 'normal' operation of the monitored component
during the life of the component. Changes in system operation
and component environment, and even changes in component
operating characteristics, are considered in the operating
program to continuously refine the normal baseline operating data
set." This feature of the invention has not been claimed in
claim 16. It is argued that "[t]he focus of the three cited
patents is to find a change (defect) in the monitored mechanism
measured against a fixed baseline, rather than to determine,
on-line, a change in the overall process of which the mechanism
is a part" (Br5). This implies that the change in the overall
process includes a change in the baseline because it is in the
same paragraph as the reference to page 6 of the specification;
however, claim 16 does not recite changing the baseline once it
has been determined. It is argued that "Applicants' method
requires an evolving baseline determined on-line, whereas the
- 7 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007