Appeal No. 2006-0871
Application No. 10/678,799
1048, 1052, 189 USPQ 143, 147 (CCPA 1976). Only those arguments
actually made by appellant have been considered in this decision.
Arguments which appellant could have made but chose not to make
in the brief have not been considered and are deemed to be waived
[see 37 CFR § 41.37(c)(1)(vii)(2004)].
We consider first the rejection of claims 1-3, 6, 11-13 and
16 based on Matsumoto, Falk and Kane. The examiner finds that
Matsumoto determines current ripples in an armature current
signal, but Matsumoto does not include means for removing
interference from the armature current signal using a voltage
signal that contains the interference. The examiner cites Falk
as teaching a circuit for removing interference using a voltage
signal that contains the interference. The examiner finds that
it would have been obvious to the artisan to modify Matsumoto to
include a means for removing interference as taught by Falk. The
examiner notes that this combination still fails to teach
performing the subtraction digitally using a Fourier transform.
The examiner cites Kane as teaching the determination of
frequency spectral results using the Fourier transform. The
examiner finds that it would have been obvious to the artisan to
modify the invention of Matsumoto and Falk to perform the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007