Appeal No. 2002-0418
Application No. 08/872,836
page 3.) Then appellants indicate there are three groups: “A,” “B,” and “D.” (See brief
at page 4.) Next, appellants indicate that claims fall in Group B and Group C (brief at
page 5), Group B (brief at page 10), and Group D (brief at page 11). Therefore, we
address appellants’ specific arguments to the specifically recited claims.
35 U.S.C. § 102
With respect to independent claim 21, appellants argue that claim 21 recites
acquiring an image of the passenger area and processing the image to determine the
size of a person in the passenger area and that the operation of the air bag is controlled
in response to the size of the person. (See brief at pages 4-5.) We agree with
appellants, but note that the language of claim 21 does not recite what type of control is
performed. The examiner maintains that the system of Breed determines size in
addition to object shapes. (See answer at pages 6-7.) From our review of the
teachings of Breed and the breadth of independent claim 21, we agree with the
examiner that Breed does recognize a difference in size between a child and adult
occupant in the passenger area and control of the airbag deployment to deploy or to
disable the airbag.2
Appellants argue that there are three separate systems in the teachings of Breed
and that the examiner is improperly picking and choosing teachings from various
2 Additionally, we note that Breed also discloses that the rate of gas generation to affect the rate
of inflation may also be controlled in another embodiment, but we need not rely upon this embodiment in
the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007