Ex parte KESSLER - Page 2




          Appeal No. 1999-1998                                                        
          Application 08/793,365                                                      


          load state of the motor.  The circuit produces a difference                 
          value between a predetermined nominal rpm value and an actual               
          rpm value, and the difference value is then compared to a                   
          predetermined limit value.  If the limit value is exceeded,                 
          the circuit emits an overload signal.                                       
               Claim 1 is the only independent claim on appeal, and it                
          reads as follows:                                                           
               1.   An improved circuit for operating a DC electric                   
          motor, the circuit having an arrangement that produces a                    
          signal serving as a measure for the rpm of the electric motor               
          and having a monitoring arrangement for detecting an increased              
          load state of the electric motor, wherein the improvement                   
          comprises:                                                                  
               the monitoring arrangement (24) compares an rpm                        
          difference (N ) between a predetermined nominal rpm value                   
                       D                                                              
          (N ) and the actual rpm determined from the actual rpm value                
            SOLL                                                                      
          signal (N ) to a predetermined limit value, and emits an                    
                   IST                                                                
          overload signal (25) if the limit value is exceeded.                        
               The references relied on by the examiner are:                          
          Fassel et al. (Fassel)   4,514,670                     Apr. 30,             
          1985                                                                        
          Iizawa et al. (Iizawa)   4,641,067                     Feb.  3,             
          1987                                                                        
          Ishikura                 5,317,244                     May  31,             
          1994                                                                        
               Claims 1, 2, 5 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §                  
          102(b) as being anticipated by Fassel.                                      
               Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being              
                                         -2-                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007