Appeal No. 1998-1503
Application No. 08/676,907
substitute a reciprocating pump for the inductive load taught
by the prior art. The instant claims explicitly call for a
reciprocating pump used as a fuel injection device comprising
the remaining claimed elements. The examiner’s argument that
it would have been obvious to employ the circuitry of Suquet
and Takahashi with a reciprocating pump because of a mere
substitution of a pump for the inductive device shown by
Suquet is overcome by appellant’s argument that the different
purposes and operation of a reciprocating pump would not have
led the skilled artisan to make such a substitution.
The examiner’s decision rejecting claims 2 and 3 under
35 U.S.C. § 103 is reversed.
REVERSED
KENNETH W. HAIRSTON )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
ERROL A. KRASS ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
) INTERFERENCES
-9-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007