Appeal 2007-2032
Application 10/275,102
1 connected to the at least one controller for performing at least one of a pre-
2 crash function, a parking assistance function and an airbag function" as
3 recited in claim 15?
4 FINDINGS OF FACT
5 We find that the following enumerated findings are supported by at
6 least a preponderance of the evidence. Ethicon, Inc. v. Quigg, 849 F.2d
7 1422, 1427, 7 USPQ2d 1152, 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (explaining the general
8 evidentiary standard for proceedings before the Office).
9 1. Appellants invented a control/evaluation system for a set of
10 sensors. In particular, the system is for use in motor vehicles. (Specification
11 1).
12 From our review of Gunderson, we make the following findings of fact as to
13 the disclosure of Gunderson:
14 2. The system includes a processor connected to a sensor
15 and a signal interface. The processor receives signals from
16 the sensor and the signal interface and generates a status
17 signal based on the signals received from the sensor and the
18 signal interface. The processor drives the status signal to the
19 signal interface.
20
21 (Gunderson, Abstract).
22
23 3. “The present invention is related to collision avoidance
24 systems, and more particularly to a stand alone sensor system with built in
25 intelligence.” (Gunderson, col. 1 ll. 8-10).
26 4. “The current collision avoidance systems are either designed as
27 multiple sensor systems having central intelligence through an on board
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013