Appeal No. 95-3876
Application 08/222,009
sixth paragraph, that Iwata's structure for performing the
function is not the same as or an equivalent of appellants'.
Further, I agree with APJ Martin that the function of
"removing the enabling voltage at the gate in response to a
flash terminating signal" may be broadly construed to read on
the function of switching off the voltage to the IGBT, which
is performed by the control voltage generation circuit 18
under the control of the operation control circuit 19 in
Iwata, and does not positively recite the disclosed function
of grounding the gate of the IGBT to quickly switch it off,
which is performed by appellants' transistor Q3 in the flash
firing control circuit 5. Therefore, I concur with APJ
Martin's decision sustaining the rejection of claims 9-14 and
reversing the rejection of claim 8. However, in view of
APJ Torczon's dissent, I would go further and address why
35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph, does not require us to
consider appellants' transistor Q3 to be part of the structure
described in the specification as corresponding to the claimed
"control means . . . for removing the enabling voltage at the
gate [of the IGBT] in response to a flash terminating signal."
- 23 -
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007