Appeal No. 1997-1389
Application 08/642,811
Finally, we turn to the rejection of claim 1 under 35
U.S.C. § 102 as being anticipated by Wilcox. We sustain this
rejection for the reasons set forth by the examiner in the
paragraph bridging pages 4 and 5 of the answer as well as the
responsive arguments addressed to this rejection at pages 8
and 9 of the answer. Appellant's brief remarks with respect
to this rejection at page 9 of the brief are, at best,
incomplete. Although the Figure 2 embodiment of Wilcox's
half-bridge circuit does monitor the gate drive voltages of
transistors 21 and 22 by means of top gate feedback node 33
and bottom gate feedback 35, the reference shows in Figure 2 a
so-called top source feedback node 34 which clearly is shown
to monitor the output voltage feeding the output node 26 for
the load 24 where this node 26 is located between the
transistors 21 and 22.
The discussion beginning at column 4, line 38 with
respect to Figure 2 in Wilcox clearly indicates that the logic
circuit 32 in fact controls the turning on and off of the
respective transistors 21 and 22 based upon this feedback
information derived from transistors 21 and 22, thus meeting
the enabling language feature at the end of claim 1 on appeal.
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007