Appeal No. 95-1844
Application 07/822,063
recognized the obviousness of applying the Markuson shut down
signal to other motors such as the Béjot motor.
Although we agree with the examiner that claim 1
recites nothing about the instantaneous indication of power
and such a property is not inherent in the claim language as
argued by appellant, we also agree with the examiner that the
measurement of power in the applied references is sufficiently
instantaneous to meet the recitations of the claims in any
case. Therefore, we sustain the rejection of claims 1, 6 and
18-22.
3. The rejection of claims 2, 3 and 7
as unpatentable over Béjot, Markuson
and Lehrmann.
These claims stand or fall together [brief, page 6].
Lehrmann is added to the previous combination to show that it
was known to use a Hall device to perform the multiplication
of current and voltage to derive a power output. Appellant
relies on the arguments presented in support of the
patentability of claim 1 to support the patentability of this
group of claims [brief, pages 17-18]. Since we determined
above that the arguments with respect to claim 1 were not
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007