Appeal No. 2003-0018
Application No. 09/035,431
measurements. Accordingly, appellant teaches the digitizing of a
measured temperature value at the location of the sensor itself,
rather than digitizing the measured temperature at a location
remote from the liquid crystal display in order to greatly reduce
these inaccuracies.
We interpret the language of independent claim 1, viz., “a
temperature sensor that provides a digitized temperature value as
the indication of the temperature...,” as requiring the
digitizing of the temperature value at the location of the
sensor, as argued by appellant. As such, and since Endo and Nash
provide for analog temperature sensing and then sending the
analog signal to an analog-to-digital converter, some distance
from the sensor, it cannot be said that either of the references
co-locate the digitization of the sensed temperature with the
temperature sensor, as required by our interpretation of
independent claim 1, or that it would have been obvious to do so
from the teachings of these references.
We note that the examiner does not contend that the
references teach co-locating the temperature sensor and the
digitizing of that signal. In fact, the examiner indicates, at
page 6 of the answer, that the “transmission path...is extremely
-6–
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007