Appeal No. 2001-2278
Application No. 09/304,267
in this regard is manifested by the examiner’s undisputed
observation, amply supported by the record, that the claim
limitations at issue read on the embodiment described in the
appellant’s specification wherein
[t]he engine load detecting means 31 fetches the intake
air quantity signal Qa supplied from the air-flow
sensor 6 to thereby output the very intake air quantity
Qa as the parameter value which corresponds to the
engine load.
In this conjunction, it should be mentioned that
the accumulating means 32 may use the intake air
quantity Qa itself intactly as a counter value
corresponding to the parameter value.
. . .
. . . the engine load detecting means 31 outputs
the intake air quantity signal Qa as the parameter
value corresponding to the engine load, while the
accumulating means 32 accumulates the intake air
quantities Qa as the counter values to arithmetically
determine the accumulated value 3Q [specification,
page 21].
Thus, the appellant’s position that the examiner’s finding
of anticipation is unsound is not persuasive. We shall therefore
sustain the standing 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 1, and
claim 3 which stands or falls therewith, as being anticipated by
Yamashita.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007