Appeal No. 1997-3179
Application No. 08/244,286
Hale that would lead the examiner to the conclusion that it
would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to eliminate
the capacitors in the circuit of Weissner.
In view of the respective positions noted above, we are
in general agreement with the appellant that the cited
references relied upon by the examiner neither teach nor would
have suggested appellant's claimed invention. We note that
claim 16 requires "...two circuit branches consisting of
inserting in series in each of the branches a first inductor
coupled with a second ferrite-core inductor." (emphasis
added). Accordingly, claim 16 specifically excludes all
elements other than a first inductor coupled in series with a
second ferrite-core inductor in each of the two circuit
branches. Like the examiner, we note that Weissner fails to
meet the limitations of claim 16 because Weissner includes,
inter alia, condensers (capacitors shown as elements 5 and 6)
in the two circuit branches. Quite the contrary, Weissner
goes so far as to require (column 2, lines 9-11) the presence
of condensers in the circuit branches for the purpose of
short-circuiting or suppressing high frequencies.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007