Appeal No. 96-3442
Application No. 08/253,884
combination of the illustrated prior art of Appellant’s Fig. 1
and Shin. Therefore, we do not sustain the rejection of
claims 2, 3, 5, and 6 for the reasons discussed above.
3. The rejection of claims 8 and 9 as being
unpatentable over the prior art as illustrated in Fig. 1 of
the present application in view of Sobue.
With respect to the Sobue patent applied by the Examiner
to provide a teaching of a base clamping circuit, Appellant
argues lack of motivation for modifying the prior art (Brief,
page 9).
Appellant contends that the purpose of the base clamping
circuit in Sobue is to avoid electrostatic destruction, a
feature which is not analogous to the reverse mode transistor
operation described in the present application. Appellant
asserts that one of ordinary skill would not combine Sobue
with the prior art since the avoidance of electrostatic
destruction as described in Sobue is a totally different
phenomenon than the prevention of the discharging of the
bootstrap capacitor accomplished by the base clamp in the
present claimed invention. Appellant further contends that
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007