Appeal No. 95-3876
Application 08/222,009
1538, 1551-52, 224 USPQ 526, 534 (Fed. Cir. 1985) ("Even if
the specification only discloses apparatus directed to
executing automatic prepositioning of the workpiece or the
measurement device or both, this does not dictate reading [the
"automatic"] limitation into the prepositioning step of the
claim.").
Nor do I agree with appellants' contention that the
"removal of a physical entity means to positively move it from
its current state, rather than merely fail to maintain it in
its state" (Reply Brief at, lines 19-20). In fact,
appellants' transistor Q3 fails to move the voltage from the
inherent gate capacitance to another location; rather, the
charge which is stored on the inherent capacitance is rapidly
discharged to ground through transistor Q3, which has the
effect of rapidly reducing the voltage stored in the inherent
capacitance to zero. Iwata's resistor 25 also removes the
charge stored in the inherent capacitance and thus reduces the
voltage stored therein to zero, albeit at a slower rate than
does appellants’ transistor Q3.
For the foregoing reasons, I agree with the examiner
that the claimed "means for . . . removing the enabling
- 17 -
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007