Appeal No. 95-5020
Application 08/151,041
initiated in the
medium substantially simultaneously with the occurrence of the
trigger pulse. In column 1, lines 5-19, McFerrin states that
his invention is concerned with locating faults in an
electrical cable. We fail to find any teaching of attempting
to measure partial discharge activity in the cable. In
addition, McFerrin fails to teach a trigger pulse that would
cause a partial discharge activity substantially
simultaneously with the occurrence of the trigger pulse.
McFerrin does teach in column 3, lines 40-52, that the pulse
used to locate a fault must be of sufficient voltage and
current to ionize the materials at the location of the fault.
However, we fail to find that McFerrin teaches that the
voltage is sufficient to cause a partial discharge in an
insulting medium that has not degraded to a failure of the
insulation as claimed by Appellant. Therefore, we find that
McFerrin fails to teach all of the limitations of claims 36,
37, 42, 46, 47, 52 and 55, and thereby the claims are not
anticipated by McFerrin.
Claim 56 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being
9
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007