Appeal No. 96-2838
Application 08/336,721
represent how long a current increase in said electrical
system has lasted. The Examiner's statement (answer, top of
page 10) that Spencer's "circuit breaker will trip when the
current exceeds a predetermined maximum allowable current
value 'for a specified period of time'" confirms this time
period measurement.
We find that Spencer does not meet the claim 13
limitation as discussed supra.
Turning to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 1, we
find
the Examiner has failed to set forth a prima facie case. It
is the burden of the Examiner to establish why one having
ordinary skill in the art would have been led to the claimed
invention by the reasonable teachings or suggestions found in
the prior art, or by a reasonable inference to the artisan
contained in such teachings or suggestions. In re Sernaker,
702 F.2d 989, 995,
217 USPQ 1, 6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Claim 1 recites "current sensing means sensing current
flowing in said electrical system" and "event signal
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007