Appeal No. 2000-0453
Application No. 09/083,901
misinterpreted the teachings of Gegner. Gegner clearly discloses that the value Nx is
the turns ratio of the primary and the secondary. (See Gegner at column 7, line 51.)
From our understanding of Gegner, the value of Nx would refer to the same turns ratio
in both Figures 5 and 6 rather than to the number of turns on the secondary for Figure 5
and a turns ratio for Figure 6. Therefore, the examiner has not shown how or where
Gegner teaches all of the limitations of independent claim 1 and has not established a
prima facie case of anticipation. Therefore, we will not sustain the rejection of claims
1-7 under 35 USC § 102.
35 USC § 103
With respect to dependent claims 8 and 9 and independent claim 10, the
examiner relies upon the teachings of Butcher to teach the use of a microprocessor for
a synchronous rectifier. (See answer at page 4.) The examiner maintains that it would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the required load current
and voltage and equated this to the determination of an optimum value. We disagree
with the examiner treatment of the limitation in independent claim 10. Essentially, the
examiner has added another reference and not relied upon the teachings therein to
teach or suggest the claimed invention. From our understanding of the teachings of
Butcher, Butcher does not remedy the deficiencies the teachings of Gegner with
respect to dependent claims 8 and 9, and we will not sustain the rejection of claims 8
and 9.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007