Appeal No. 2002-0029 10
Application No. 09/437535
includes means for sensing the presence and position of passengers, and that this
information is used to, among other things, inhibit operation of the restraint, we consider
that the method of claim 36 would flow as a natural consequence from the normal
usage of the modified Kaji device. Compare, In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 1326, 231
USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
We will sustain the § 103(a) rejection of claim 39 as being unpatentable over Kaji
in view of White. White’s ultrasonic acoustic sensor 26 for sensing the position
assumed by the passenger is disclosed as including a transmitter and a detector
(column 4, lines 42-44). For the reasons set forth above in our discussion of claim 7, it
logically flows from the combined teachings of the applied references that at least the
detector component of the sensor should be located in close proximity to the door
mounted side airbag in applying the teachings of White in Kaji.
We also will sustain the § 103(a) rejection of claim 40. The only argument made
by appellants specifically directed to this claim is found on page 10 of the main brief,
wherein appellants assert that White does not teach or suggest at least two cooperating
components to determine whether an occupant is present in the seat; however, we view
the sensor 24 of White for sensing the presence of a passenger in conjunction with its
wiring for transmitting the sensor signal to the control module 36 as comprising at least
two cooperating components arranged to provide a signal indicative of an occupant’s
LJS/
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007