Appeal No. 2006-1094
Application No. 09/976,788
value of input torque. Second, we find that one of ordinary skill in the field of
appellant’s invention would have been familiar with at least basic concepts of
mechanical engineering and engine design and we take notice of the notoriously
well known and basic mechanical engineering concept that every engine has a
characteristic speed-torque curve, as illustrated by Marks’ Mechanical Engineers’
Handbook, Eighth Edition, p. 9-87, Fig. 11 (McGraw-Hill 1978) (copy attached
hereto). We thus find that the examiner’s position that the engine speed or RPM
measured by Cowan and used in calculating the desired slip is indicative of engine
torque applied as input to the torque converter is well taken. Further, Cowan’s
discussion of allowing torque transients, or rapid increases or decreases in torque,
merely describes the type of torque transients inherent in a closed-loop control
system and is in no way an indication that torque is disregarded in Cowan’s
system. Finally, on the basis of the above findings, we conclude that Cowan’s
electronic control system, which calculates desired slip using a signal generated by
the measurement of engine speed, selects the setpoint or desired slip value “taking
into account the input torque” currently applied to the torque converter.
In light of the above, we shall sustain the rejection of claim 1 as being
anticipated by Cowan. We shall also sustain the like rejection of claims 2-30,
which stand or fall with representative claim 1, as discussed above.
CONCLUSION
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007