Appeal No. 96-0656
Application 08/099,277
automobile battery. An automobile battery would have multiple separate battery cells of
the same size and each would have internal contacts to each other. Hodgman ('144) and
Patino do not clearly teach multiple separate battery cells.
Dey is relied upon by the Examiner to teach the use of a "reverse polarity detector
circuit" and that the charging circuitry "operates in a non-charging mode if the reverse
polarity detector determines that at least one of the battery cells was received in the battery
receiving well with an incorrect polarity" as set forth in the language of claim 7. Clearly,
Dey does not operate the charging circuitry in a non-charging mode in response to reverse
polarity detections. Dey merely detects the reverse polarity and sounds an alarm.
Appellant argues that the combination of the three references lack "a reference
network that would enable such networks." (See brief at page 6, paragraph 3.) We
disagree. The claims do not require the reference network to "enable" the other circuits,
but only that the reference are voltages used by the circuits. Furthermore, Hodgman ('144)
does disclose the use of a reference voltage source, but not how the voltage is formed. A
resistive network was a common means to provide a reference voltage by a voltage
divider circuit. (See Hodgman ('243) discussed infra.) None of
the references clearly teach or suggest the reference network that "produces a plurality of
reference network voltages in response to the transformer reference voltage" as set forth in
claim 7 and the Examiner has not provided a motivation to modify the combina-tion of
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007