Appeal No. 1997-3237
Application 08/266,081
Kanzaki in col. 2, lines 33 through 42 and Fig. 1 teaches
that in response to increased DC bus voltage a switch connects
the resistor 5 to the DC link so that the excess regenerated
power is dissipated in the resistor. Kanzaki merely redirects
the regenerated power to a resistor without making any changes
to the way the regenerated power is produced. We do not find
that the resistor 5 affects the efficiency of the regenerated
power as recited in claim 1. It acts merely as a load for
dissipating power that would otherwise be directed to the DC
bus. Therefore, Kanzaki fails to teach the operating of an
electric motor in regeneration mode at two different operating
points where the second point has a reduced efficiency
compared to the first point in response to a regeneration
current as recited in Appellants’ claim 1. Accordingly, we
reverse the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
Turning to the rejection of claim 6, Appellants on pages
2 and 3 of the reply brief argue that Takada does not teach
the limitation of operating the motor at a second operating
point with reduced efficiency as recited in claim 6.
Appellants further state that Takada is silent with regard to
changing the operation point of the motor in response to
11
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007