Appeal No. 1996-3126
Application No. 08/300,586
As to claims 2 and 22, the examiner contends (Final
Rejection, page 3) that the switches in the references have pn
junctions, which are known to have varactor capacitance
associated therewith. In the Examiner's Answer (page 7), the
examiner explains that transistors have interelectrode
capacitance and thus concludes that the limitation of varactor
capacitance is met. In other words, the examiner appears to
equate varactor capacitance with interelectrode capacitance.
We agree with appellants (Brief, page 7) that it is not true
that the disclosed switches inherently have varactor
capacitance, and the examiner has provided no evidence to
persuade us otherwise. Further, Sokal gives no indication
that the transistor capacitance is a varactor capacitance.
Therefore, we must reverse the rejection of claims 2 and 22
over Sokal.
Krauss states on page 450 that "capacitance C is
independent of voltage (i.e., there are no varactor effects),"
where C equals the capacitance C inherent in the transistor
1
and capacitance C added to improve the amplifier (see page
2
448). In other words, Krauss does not include a varactor
capacitor, and therefore cannot anticipate claims 2 and 22.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007