Appeal No. 96-4027
Application 08/392,663
tripping unit and the tripping unit TU within the housing HS. Turning to Figure 1, we find that Murphy
shows by a dash line marked HS the housing of the circuit breaker. Therefore, we find that Murphy
teaches a sealed package as claimed by Appellants.
Upon our review of the record, we find it important to clarify that the prior art does teach and
fairly suggest having a default mode with nothing connected to the external connection points and a
second mode which can accommodate different load characteristics by adding external components to
extend certain values. Dougherty clearly teaches (col. 4, line 12 et. seq. ) the storage of fixed points in
EEPROM 29, where the external programmer 38 inputs instructions. These instructions would be to
modify the curve data stored in EEPROM 29. Dougherty thereby teaches the modification of operating
limits from an externally connected circuit. As set forth by the examiner, skilled artisans would have
been motivated to replace the "complex Dougherty processor with a simple RC network taught by
Adamson, since doing so would provide for a simpler, cheaper arrangement for adjusting time delays"
(Examiner Answer, page 6).
We note that the Appellants have not argued that the Examiner’s reasoning for combining
references is improper. However, Appellants do argue on page 14 of the brief that the references do
not suggest Appellants' provision of a sealed controller as claimed.
As pointed out above, we found that Murphy teaches a sealed package for a solid state
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007