Appeal No. 95-1188
Application No. 08/046,127
Petkovsek 4,401,895 Aug. 30, 1983
Heavey et al. (Heavey) 4,468,571 Aug. 28, 1984
Schneider 4,560,887 Dec. 24, 1985
Donze 4,837,672 June 6, 1989
Jackson et al. (Jackson) 4,884,013 Nov. 28, 1989
Claims 1, 2, 9, 14 through 18 and 20 through 24 stand
rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over
Petkovsek in view of Heavey, the alleged prior art on page 5 of
the specification, and Jackson. Burgin is added to the
combination of references for claims 3 and 5, Miyazawa is added
to the combination of references for claim 6, Schneider is added
to the combination of references for claims 4, 10, 11 and 19,
Schneider and Hosaka are added to the combination of references
for claims 12 and 13, and Donze and Wright are added to the
combination of references for claims 7 and 8.
Reference is made to the briefs, the answers, and the Office
Action (paper number 16) for the positions of the appellant and
the examiner.
OPINION
We have carefully considered the entire record before
us, and we will reverse the obviousness rejection of claims 1
through 24.
Petkovsek discloses (Figure 1) a system for applying
uninterruptible DC power to a load at output terminals 10c and
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007