Appeal No. 1996-1088
Application 08/251,999
limiting the rate to within a predetermined range.” The
examiner argues that Arai’s controller is capable of providing
a rate of change in the measured values provided to it
(answer, pages 6 and 13). This argument is not well taken
because, as discussed above, the examiner has not established
that the teachings of Saito and Arai would have fairly
suggested, to one of ordinary skill in the art, using Arai’s
controller in Saito’s control system. We therefore reverse
the rejection of claims 12-14 and claim 15 which depends from
claim 14.
Rejection of claims 3-9 over Saito taken with
Arai and Yamaguchi, and rejection of claims 6-9
over Saito taken with Arai, Yamaguchi and Lin
Independent claims 3 and 6 require “means for varying a
mean value of the dc voltage at a constant rate.” For the
reasons given above regarding claims 1 and 10, which include
this limitation, we reverse the rejection of claim 3 and claim
4 which depends therefrom, and the rejections of claim 6.1
The examiner argues that claim 5 stands or falls with
1 The examiner relies upon Yamaguchi for a disclosure of a
mineral adding device (answer, page 7), and not for any
teaching which would have fairly suggested, to one of ordinary
skill in the art, the voltage varying means discussed above.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007