Appeal No. 1996-1088
Application 08/251,999
THE REJECTIONS
The claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
follows: claims 1, 2 and 10-15 over Saito taken with Arai;
claims 3-9 over Saito taken with Arai and Yamaguchi; and
claims 6-9 over Saito taken with Arai, Yamaguchi and Lin.
OPINION
We have carefully considered all of the arguments
advanced by appellants and the examiner and agree with
appellants that the aforementioned rejections are not well
founded. Accordingly, we reverse these rejections.
Rejection of claims 1, 2 and 10-15
over Saito taken with Arai
Independent claims 1 and 10 require “means for varying a
mean value of the dc voltage at a constant rate.” The
examiner states that Saito discloses (col. 4, lines 64-68)
that “[t]he controller controls the base voltage of the
transistor 34 in correspondence with the result of the
calculation, thereby controlling the output voltage of the
transistor 34, namely, the voltage applied to the electrolytic
cell 3”, and acknowledges that Saito does not discloses the
recited voltage varying means (answer, page 3). The examiner
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007