Appeal No. 96-3090 Page 11
Application 08/287,409
Angott uses a motor 158 to adjust the thermostat switch.
(8:56-9:11.)
Augustyniak suggests a switch lever that protrudes
through a conventional face plate and that reciprocates in
response to an actuator. (Fig. 1; 1:50-58; 3:3-19.) He also
teaches a motorized time-keeping mechanism 28. (1:59-2:13.)
Augustyniak provides motivation for a simple actuator that
uses an existing toggle switch. (1:29-34.)
Pfeiffer provides motivation for a computerized actuator.
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been
motivated to use a computerized actuator with Augustyniak's
simpler mechanism. An artisan implementing this combination
would not, however, need to retain Augustyniak's motor or be
motivated to use the motor as the actuator in this
combination. Angott does not provide a reason to include a
motor with the actuator either. Consequently, neither
combination would produce a programmable actuator with an
electric motor as claim 53 requires. We cannot, therefore,
conclude that the subject matter of claim 53 would have been
obvious in view of Pfeiffer and either Angott or Augustyniak.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007