Appeal No. 2004-0129
Application No. 09/230,720
Spinner discloses (column 4, lines 23-30 and 43-51, column
7, lines 33-44, and column 8, lines 15-34 and 54-59) that based
on information sent to the host 20 from the actuator controllers,
the host calculates and transmits to the actuator controllers
desired setpoints. Then, based on status information from
adjacent controllers, the controllers calculate those target
setpoints and determine whether the new setpoints can be
processed. Thus, as indicated by the examiner, there is peer-to-
peer communication. However, the actuators are still slaves with
the host as the master, since the actuators do not act until and
unless the host sends a target setpoint. As long as the host
plays that role in the determination of actuator setpoints, the
actuators are not part of a decentralized communications hardware
structure.
We note that although the examiner included Flamm in the
rejection of claims 26 through 50, the examiner admits (Answer,
page 3) that Flamm was only relied upon for a pipeline ring,
which is claimed in the alternative in claim 26. Flamm adds
nothing with regard to the decentralized communications hardware
structure. Therefore, we cannot sustain the obviousness
rejection of claims 26 through 50 over Spinner in view of Flamm.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007