Appeal No. 95-1188
Application No. 08/046,127
the output terminals 10c, 10d of the Petkovsek device
[be] modified by Heavey et al to include AC output
receptacle means as such output terminals include an
internal voltage rectifier coupled to its input AC
connector.
The alleged prior art on page 5 of appellant’s specification
is merely a statement that the supported device 20 (Figure 2)
typically includes a rectifier. Appellant’s statement does not
mention “typical supported devices such as those of Petkovsek and
Heavey.” Thus, appellant has not admitted that typical supported
devices include rectifiers.
We agree with the examiner (paper number 16, page 5) that it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to
place the Petkovsek system in a housing as taught by Heavey “to
reduce the electrical shock hazard created by exposed circuitry.”
We do not, however, agree with the examiner’s conclusion (paper
number 16, page 6) that it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to modify the output terminals 10c and
10d of Petkovsek in keeping with the teachings of Heavey to
provide an AC output from terminals 10c and 10d. The examiner
has failed to present a convincing line of reasoning as to why
the skilled artisan would have wanted to change the DC output on
terminals 10c and 10d of Petkovsek to an AC output so that the AC
output could be rectified to produce a DC voltage which already
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007