Appeal No. 99-0047
Application 08/574,792
these references meets the limitations in independent claims 1
and 10 relating to the inducement and monitoring/measurement
of an electric current in a handrail conductor or the
limitation in claim 8 requiring the handrail conductor(s) to
form an electrically closed continuous loop such that an
electrical current may be induced therein. The examiner’s
reliance on Kuraki, Buckeridge, Duffy or Ratz to cure these
deficiencies is not well founded.
Duffy and Ratz relate to endless conveyor belts having
closed loop current conductors which are monitored to detect
damage to the belt. Kuraki discloses a belt conveyor
containing a steel cord which indicates damage via changes in
inductance. Buckeridge pertains to a conveyor belt having
conductors therein for transmitting personnel-generated
control signals to a control box.
According to the examiner, “[i]t would have been obvious
that the belt embedded field generating elements 16 of
Kobayashi or 30 of Yasuhara could be closed looped elements
like in Kuraki, 27 of Buckeridge et al. or 12 of Duffy or 3-6
of Ratz” (final rejection, page 2). As pointed out by the
appellants, however,
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007