Appeal No. 1998-1444 Page 5
Application No. 08/543,933
The examiner asserts, "Yum discloses the claimed device
... except for constant voltage power supply. Buck discloses
that it is known in the art to provide a constant voltage
power supply." (Examiner's Answer at 4.) The appellant
argues, "Yum does not extract a reference voltage from the
junction of the voltage divider circuit to which the
temperature compensating current source is connected."
(Appeal Br. at 4.)
“‘[T]he main purpose of the examination, to which every
application is subjected, is to try to make sure that what
each claim defines is patentable. [T]he name of the game is
the claim ....’” In re Hiniker Co., 150 F.3d 1362, 1369,
47 USPQ2d 1523, 1529 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (quoting Giles S. Rich,
The Extent of the Protection and Interpretation of
Claims--American Perspectives, 21 Int'l Rev. Indus. Prop. &
Copyright L. 497, 499, 501 (1990)). Here, claims 11-13 each
specifies in pertinent part the following limitations: "a
reference voltage linearly changing with temperature being
output from said voltage divider junction." Accordingly, the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007