Appeal No. 2002-1866 Page 5
Application No. 09/346,814
the prior art, discovering the optimum value of a workable range involves only routine
skill in the art” (Answer, page 6).
Wieder also is directed to a system for assisting the operator of a vehicle in
approaching an obstacle while traveling in reverse. The operation of the Wieder
system is explained in the paragraph beginning at line 53 of column 4. A basic
difference between Wieder and the appellant’s system as recited in claim 21 is that
Wieder discloses only two zones, and assigns a velocity value to only the outer of the
two zones, where “the velocity of the vehicle cannot exceed the limit value” even if the
operator were to specify a higher speed (column 5, lines 3-5). Another difference
resides in the manner in which the vehicle is controlled as it is brought toward the
obstacle. In the Wieder system, once into the inner of the two zones, braking force is
applied to stop the vehicle (column 5, lines 5-8). The driver then actuates an approach
switch, and braking force and engine power are intermittently applied to cause the
vehicle to move at a minimum speed toward the obstacle until a particular time has
passed, at which time the driver deactivates the approach switch and the brakes are
again applied to bring the vehicle to a stop (column 5, lines 12-17). The approach
switch then is activated by the driver once more, and the vehicle is moved rearward by
the same intermittent operation of brakes and power until it has reached the obstacle,
at which time the switch is deactivated for the final time and the brakes applied
(column 5, lines 18-22).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007