Appeal No. 1996-0427
Application 08/210,224
pulses as claimed are provided by the structure disclosed in
the specification and that these elements as selected and
interconnected provide the number of pulses during any turn on
sequence which will be invariant regardless of the variations
in the frequency of the clock signal or variations in the
level of
the voltage supplied to the apparatus providing controlled
turn on of the power regulator. Appellants further argue that
Yamamura provides pulses as a function of the rise time of V1
and the amplitude of saw tooth voltage ST, thereby Yamamura
fails to teach "a sequence of predetermined pulses" as claimed
by Appellants.
It is axiomatic that anticipation of a claim under
§ 102 can be found only if the prior art reference discloses
every element of the claim. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324,
1326, 231 USPQ 136, 138 (Fed. Cir. 1986) and Lindemann
Maschinenfabrik GMBH v. American Hoist & Derrick Co., 730 F.2d
1452, 1458, 221 USPQ 481, 485 (Fed. Cir. 1984). "Anticipation
is established only when a single prior art reference
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007