Appeal No. 2006-0242
Application No. 09/920,728
Appellants argue that since Moberg does not disclose any force
sensor, and since Moberg teaches eliminating the use of force
sensors, a person of skill in the art at the time that the
instant invention was conceived could not have considered as
obvious the reversing of the drive of the syringe pump until
the force detected by the force sensor is substantially 10% of
the force at which an occlusion is detected.
Appellants’ argument is not persuasive because Moberg does
teach a force sensor that detects reservoir pressure indirectly
by detecting motor parameters (Column 5, lines 32-48). Also,
Moberg discloses that the occlusion detection system causes the
pump to “rewind by some predetermined amount” until there is no
excess pressure (Column 6, lines 5-13).
We agree with the examiner that a person of ordinary skill in
the art could determine, by routine experimentation, the value
of force at which the pump reverses direction which would
produce optimum results. We note that, it is the general rule
that discovery of an optimum value of a result effective
variable is ordinary within the skill of the art. See In re
Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 276, 205 USPQ 215, 219 (CCPA 1980) and In
re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007