Appeal No. 2005-0682 Page 11
Application No. 10/064,682
disclosure is sufficient to show that the natural result flowing from the
operation as taught would result in the performance of the questioned
function, it seems to be well settled that the disclosure should be regarded
as sufficient.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject
independent claims 10 and 20, and claims 11 to 19 and 21, 22, 25 and 26 dependent
thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) is reversed.
Claims 23 and 24 read as follows:
23. A trailer brake controller as described in claim 1, wherein said control
element includes logic adapted to:
gradually ramp-up said trailer brake output in response to a gradual
ramp-up of said brake pressure input; and
apply a step-function to said trailer brake output in response to a sudden
increase of said brake pressure input.
24. A trailer brake controller as described in claim 1, wherein said control
element includes logic adapted to:
increase a gain of said trailer brake output in response to an increase in
said vehicle speed input.
In our view, dependent claims 23 and 24 are not anticipated by McGrath.
McGrath does not disclose that the control element includes logic adapted to
(1) gradually ramp-up the trailer brake output in response to a gradual ramp-up of the
brake pressure input; and (2) apply a step-function to the trailer brake output in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007