Appeal No. 2000-1954
Application No. 08/593,459
operator takes pictures at random times, the toff time is random
and variable such that switching transistor device T is caused
“. . . to switch on and off in different manners in accordance
with said determination . . .” as in claim 11.
In view of findings, above, we will sustain the rejection of
claims 1-4, 6, 8-10 and 23.
Appellants make further arguments which apply to claims
12-14, 24 and 26. It is submitted that Hauenstein does not
disclose the control of charging speed in accordance with the
voltage detected by two detectors. The contention is also made
that the reference does not teach the variation of charging rate
according to the detected power supply voltage.
Appellants’ first argument is unpersuasive. Claims 12-14
and 24 recite that a controller controls charge speed, and the
detection provided by Hauenstein’s controller S controls charge
speed of capacitor CL. Clearly, the controller, in cooperation
with the values of the other circuit elements, sets and controls
1 We also agree with the examiner’s statement at page 4 of the answer
to the effect that device T switches on and off in different manners
because a signal of one value is supplied to the base of T to switch
it on and a signal of a second, different value is supplied to the
base of T to switch it off.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007