Appeal 2007-3126
Application 10/359,275
In view of Abdelgawad’s teaching that “current sensing alone is not a
reliable indicator under circumstances where high voltage is present across the
switch, i.e., power is on, but no current is flowing” (Abdelgawad, col. 7, ll. 60-62),
and in view of Abdelgawad’s disclosure of a voltage-sensing circuit having
components that can be located in either the pull-rod 135 (Fig. 6) or in the base
portion 48 of the insulating body (Fig. 5), we find that a person skilled in the art
would have recognized the desirability of adding a similar voltage-sensing
capability to Zunick. Furthermore, because Abdelgawad’s shielding feature is
optional, the artisan would have been motivated to achieve this result by adding
Abdelgawad’s series-connecting voltage-sensing resistors to Zunick’s switching
device in either one of the following two places: (1) in the operating rod 25; or (2)
in the insulating shell 11 of the switch device. Because locating the resistors in the
insulating shell would not satisfy the claims, the following discussion is limited to
the alternative approach of including the resistors in the operating rod.
Regarding this manner of implementation, we understand the Examiner’s
position to be that it would have been obvious to locate the resistors inside the
cavity in Zunick’s tubular operating rod 25, which is made of filament wound
epoxy, and to use an epoxy resin to secure the resistors in the desired positions in
that cavity. See Answer 4 (“it would have been obvious to . . . to provide a sensor
in the tube and encapsulate the sensor in epoxy resin as suggested by Abdelgawad
et al., in order to sense the shield [sic—electrode] voltage”) (citing Abdelgawad at
column 5, lines 46-48). Furthermore, the “epoxy resin” the Examiner proposes to
use for this purpose is the engineered epoxy resin used to form the first epoxy
10
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013