Appeal No. 1997-2162
Application 08/280,430
the desired height, the limit switch interrupts lifting and
causes the platform to stop and remain at that height.
Turning to the rejection of claim 22, Appellants on page
18 of the answer argue that the combination of Gary, Shah, and
Grove teaches neither the DC powered control circuits nor the
battery for emergency power. Appellants further point out
that the limitation of the emergency power to lower the car
and the mechanical latch at the gate in the absence of AC
power is not taught by the prior art.
The Examiner on pages 8 and 9 of the answer argues that
Gary teaches both mechanical and electrical latches. The
Examiner further points out that Grove’s battery is used to
lower the car and open the doors during an emergency loss of
AC power.
We find that Gary in col. 6, lines 26 through 37 teaches
that the back panel 30 is kept in vertical position by a
spring that is under tension through the hydraulic ram 90
which in turn is actuated by the electrical signal provided by
the control switches on the car. The other gate 34 is taught
in col. 7, lines 7 through 9 to be operated without any
electrically actuated mechanism for latching the gate. Gary
18
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007