Ex Parte LEYDE et al - Page 2




          Appeal No. 2001-2340                                                        
          Application No. 09/141,707                                                  


                    a sense battery cell coupled in series with the main              
          battery cell and having a second charge-storage capacity that is            
          less than the first charge-storage capacity; and                            
                    a battery-charge indicator operable to monitor a                  
          parameter of the sense battery cell and to determine the charge             
          on the main batter cell from the monitored parameter.                       

          The references relied upon by the examiner are:                             
          Kuo et al. (Kuo)                5,250,905         Oct. 05, 1993             
          Cameron et al. (Cameron)        5,483,165         Jan. 09, 1996             
          Claims 1, 6, and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                           
          § 102(b) as anticipated by Cameron.                                         
          Claims 10-12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as                     
          anticipated by Kuo.                                                         
          Claims 8 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as                   
          being unpatentable over Cameron.                                            
          Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being                  
          unpatentable over Kuo.                                                      
          Claims 1-5, 15-25 and 33-38 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.                  
          § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Cameron in view of Kuo.                 
          The respective positions of the examiner and appellants with                
          regard to the propriety of these rejections are set forth in the            
          examiner’s answer (Paper No. 15) and the appellants’ brief and              
          reply brief (Paper Nos. 14 and 16, respectively).                           


          -2-                                                                         





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

Last modified: November 3, 2007