Appeal No. 2006-1920
Application No. 10/846,504
The examiner further notes that the laws of physics provide a
relationship to convert acceleration of a wheel to the rotation velocity or
wheel speed of the wheel. [See Answer at p. 8].
While the examiner is correct that acceleration is derivable from velocity, Magiawala
does not indicate whether the measurement of acceleration requires, and therefore
inherently incorporates, the measurement of velocity, and furthermore, all of the
independent claims require that it is the velocity signal, and not an acceleration signal,
that is used in determining the condition of the shock absorber. Therefore, we find the
examiner's arguments to be unpersuasive.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the examiner’s rejection of claims 1, 2, 9, 19, 20,
33 and 34 as rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Magiawala.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007