Appeal No. 1998-3076
Application 08/303,046
Bilas et al. (Bilas) 5,231,565 July 27, 1993
Claims 2 through 45 and 53 through 60 stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Bilas.
Reference is made to the briefs and the answer for the
respective positions of the appellant and the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before us,
and we will sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 16
through 21, 33 through 35, 37 and 40, and we will reverse the
anticipation rejection of claims 2 through 15, 22 through 32,
36, 38, 39, 41 through 45 and 53 through 60.
The reference to Bilas, like appellant’s disclosed and
claimed invention, is directed to electrical power
distribution. The primary function that Bilas is concerned
with controlling is an overcurrent or an overload condition
via the use of circuit breakers. The functions of overcurrent
and overload are two of the many functions performed by
appellant’s disclosed invention (specification, pages 3, 6,
11, 14, 15, 17 and 18). Inasmuch as a node is nothing more
than a circuit connecting point, Bilas, like appellant’s
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007