Appeal No. 2005-1862 Page 6
Application No. 09/799,088
Thus, even if it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a
person having ordinary skill in the art to use the LRG of Desmarais in the invention of
Swindall such would not have arrived at the claimed invention which requires the slope
of the pavement be determined by comparing the vehicle roll as determined from
distance measurement devices with the slope of the vehicle determined from the
gyroscope.
For the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1, 5
and 9, and claims 4, 8, 12 to 14 and 16 dependent thereon, under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
being unpatentable over Swindall in view of Desmarais is reversed.
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 17 and 18
We have reviewed the patent to Shoutaro applied in the rejection of dependent
claims 2, 6, 10 and 17 and the patent to Okada applied in the rejection of dependent
claims 3, 7, 11 and 18 but find nothing therein which makes up for the deficiencies of
Swindall in view of Desmarais discussed above regarding claims 1, 5 and 9.
Accordingly, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 17 and 18
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007