Ex parte POST - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1999-2388                                                        
          Application 08/758,513                                                      


          the manner in which the stator windings couple energy into and              
          out of the rotor.                                                           
          Representative claim 1 is reproduced as follows:                            
               1.   An electric machine, comprising:                                  
               a cylindrical rotor comprising an array of permanent                   
          magnets that provide a uniform dipole field; and                            
               a stator inserted down the axis of said dipole field,                  
          wherein said rotor is on the outside of said stator, said                   
          stator comprising a first set of windings and a second set of               
          windings, wherein said first set of windings are orthogonal to              
          said second set of windings, wherein said first set of                      
          windings and said second set of windings together comprise                  
          orthogonal windings, wherein said first set of windings are                 
          electrically decoupled from said second set of windings;                    
               means for providing power to said first set of windings,               
          wherein power is delivered to said first set of windings to                 
          bring said rotor up to its normal operating speed, wherein                  
          said rotor will store kinetic energy.                                       
          The examiner relies on the following references:                            
          Post                          3,683,216          Aug. 08, 1972              
          Paulsen                       4,990,808          Feb. 05, 1991              
          Leupold                       5,349,258          Sep. 20, 1994              
          Claims 1-9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  As                        
          evidence of obviousness the examiner offers Paulsen taken                   
          alone with respect to claims 1-4 and 7-9, Paulsen in view of                
          Post with respect to claim 5, and Paulsen in view of Leupold                
          with respect to claim 6.                                                    

                                         -2-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007