Appeal No. 2005-2151
Application No. 09/822,473
examiner clarifies in the responsive arguments that time 6 of Yasooka is the switch
control circuit used for controlling the switching 12c of electronically switching capacitors
12a and 12b and further directs attention to paragraph [0020]. We agree with the
examiner that Yasooka teaches an electronic formula frequency complement means 6
to select the appropriate frequency by adjusting the capacitance. (See also Yasooka
paragraph [0013].) We find no indication in the file that appellants filed a Reply Brief to
address the above teachings of Yasooka or the examiner’s reliance thereon. Therefore,
we find that appellants have not shown error in or rebutted the examiner’s prima facie
case of anticipation. Therefore, we will sustain the examiner’s rejection of independent
claim 1 and dependent claim 3.
35 U.S.C. § 103
Appellants argue that the teachings of MacDonald do not remedy the deficiencies
of Yasooka as argued with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102. We do not
find this argument to be specific with respect to the limitations of dependent claim 2.
Therefore, we do not find the argument persuasive, and we will sustain the rejection of
dependent claim 2.
CONCLUSION
To summarize, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103 is AFFIRMED.
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007