Appeal No. 1997-2162
Application 08/280,430
inverter 66 for providing emergency DC power to the “down-slow
valve” and the “relay coil DO” for safe descent of the
elevator. We note that Grove explicitly teaches that the
control system is on 115-volts alternating current during its
normal operation. Grove in col. 5, lines 22 through 46 and
Fig. 3 further discloses that in the event of a power failure,
the DC power from the storage battery 64 actuates switches and
relays which, in turn, allows the elevator to descend to a
reference floor and the doors to open so that the occupants
can exit.
In view of the findings above, we conclude that neither
Shah nor Grove teach a DC source that powers both the first
and the second control circuits for raising and lowering of
the elevator car. Both Shah and Grove use control circuits
for raising and lowering the elevator that are powered by
alternating current during the normal operation. Shah’s DC
power is supplied only to the microcomputer and Grove’s
battery supplies DC power only to the second circuit for
emergency lowering of the elevator during a power failure.
Therefore, we reverse the rejection of claims 7, 8, 10, and 13
through 16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Gary, Shah, and Grove
12
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007