Appeal No. 1999-1937
Application No. 08/470,122
converter, as disclosed by
DeDoncker, for a generally identified DC/DC converter in Dishner. However, this is
not the case because Dishner is very specific in identifying the DC/DC converter 52 as
the circuit shown in Dishner’s Figure 3 and also discloses a very specific function for
that circuit.
More specifically, Dishner discloses that if the prime mover speed range is
constrained, as described in column 5, lines 5-31 of Dishner, then DC/DC converter 52
may be replaced by a DC/DC converter 70 as seen in Fig. 3. Thus, Dishner is directed
to a specific configuration of the DC/DC converter, viz., that circuit shown in Figure
3 of the patent. While Dishner discloses that converter 52 of Figure 1 may be
replaced by converter 70 of Figure 3, this does not mean that any DC/DC converter,
e.g., that of DeDoncker, may act as a replacement for Dishner’s converter 52. The
specific function sought by Dishner for the DC/DC converter is that the converter acts
only as a boost converter when the power flow is from one permanent magnet
machine to the other machine and acts as a buck converter when the power flow is
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007